Young Mallory Merk is a 12-year-old girl who set out to get a new hairstyle one day after being out with her family and spotting a woman sporting a style she liked. But when Mallory posted the selfies she took of her new hairdo to social media, she was ripped to shreds by some awful people for being racist.
The website B. Scott posted Mallory’s story along with the photos she uploaded showing her with long blonde hair which had been box braided throughout. Excited to show off her new look to her friends like any young teen girl would be, Mallory posted the photos to Twitter, and once the photos started making their way around the web things escalated out of control.
In one of the more bizarre stories I’ve done this year, people actually found this pretty young girl’s hair to be offensive. Some even considered it to be cultural appropriation, which would mean they believe braided hair to be a cultural element of black people only, and that’s just ridiculous.
The moonbat editor of Ebony.com, also a former member of the Black Panther Party and professional race-baiter, took the opportunity to promote her hatred for all things white while making bold accusations against Mallory, who, mind you, is a 12-year-old. But I guess when you’re blinded by hatred, the age of the “oppressor” doesn't matter so much.
That’s classy, accuse a little girl of blind hatred. I think they refer to that as psychological projection. Someone get this chick some chocolate before she explodes.
Fortunately, Mallory had plenty of support from others, including black women, because they saw the absurdity in people berating a little girl for her hair style.
I believe the saddest part of this story is that Mallory was forced into an apology for doing nothing more than trying out a new style.
It appears this 12-year-old is much more mature than many adults.
I believe this story is a sad commentary on the state of our nation after years of racial division promoted by the progressive left has taken its toll. When people can find offense in a hairstyle and feel as if it’s being “stolen” from their culture, then it might be time to take a look at what we’re teaching people while publicly shaming those who would attack a young girl over something so trivial.
I’d like to point out that slavery ended hundreds of years ago, the Civil Rights Movement gave way to equality for all, and now people are just being stupid. Instead of worrying about this girl’s hair, why don’t these people do some research and get angry over something that matters, like our national debt or foreign relations going down the drain?
When the wife was in high school she was on the track team. The black girls loved to braid her hair. She'd show up to competitions looking just like that. That used to be called the Bo Derek look.
People have no sense of historic beauties of the past.
Frazzled wrote: When the wife was in high school she was on the track team. The black girls loved to braid her hair. She'd show up to competitions looking just like that. That used to be called the Bo Derek look.
People have no sense of historic beauties of the past.
This.
To quote K from Men In Black:
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.
Now that you've caught on, you can join the rest of us in being ashamed of our skin color. We'll be meeting next thursday. Just make sure you check your privilege at the door.
It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
What are you saying? This is crazy THIS IS MADNESS OMGOMGOMG!!!!11!!!!§§§
Now that you've caught on, you can join the rest of us in being ashamed of our skin color. We'll be meeting next thursday. Just make sure you check your privilege at the door.
For safety, be sure to clear the breech on your privilege before checking it.
In short:
- yeah, people reacted badly, and that sucks.
- but they're sensitive to it for a reason and you'll make the world a better place if you look into why cultural appropriation is terrible.
Let's not split ends, everyone needs to cut it out before this situation becomes any more tangled. It's nothing anyone has to dye over, rest a-sheared this is just a hairlarious mix up. Part of cultures mixing is the fringe benefits, like braids. This is not a Con Hair situation. This young girl has proudly declared "Hair I am!", instead of trimming her down to size the rallying cry should be "Hair's looking at you, kid".
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Ah, more of this "cultural appropriation" bull gak, where doing anything involving a culture that is somehow not "yours" makes you both racist and an oppressor. It's probably on the "Easy Tier" of social justice malarkey, but it's no less annoying.
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Aren't you enlightened? I guess intolerance is actually a good thing, as long as its against white people. Two wrongs DO make a right.
(On a serious note, I hate racism and bigotry no matter where I find it. I also happen to hate it when its disguised as self righteous justice against perceived wrongs.)
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Aren't you enlightened? I guess intolerance is actually a good thing, as long as its against white people. Two wrongs DO make a right.
(On a serious note, I hate racism and bigotry no matter where I find it. I also happen to hate it when its disguised as self righteous justice against perceived wrongs.)
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Aren't you enlightened? I guess intolerance is actually a good thing, as long as its against white people. Two wrongs DO make a right.
(On a serious note, I hate racism and bigotry no matter where I find it. I also happen to hate it when its disguised as self righteous justice against perceived wrongs.)
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
If someone hits another person with a rock because of the color of their skin its racism. It doesn't matter the color of the skin involved.
Ah tumblr (cause that's where it always starts, tumblr!) They just ruin everything (feminism, gender discussions...) they're like Candiru, brutally maiming the idea they rely on for survival (the idea is the hypothetical junk)...
They put ideas in your head, sometimes it almost passes for good. Like growing up I just always assumed I was an effeminate weirdo, tried some of their mindless labels, felt dumber and am back to the first thing.
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
That's what our culture would have you believe, yep.
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Aren't you enlightened? I guess intolerance is actually a good thing, as long as its against white people. Two wrongs DO make a right.
(On a serious note, I hate racism and bigotry no matter where I find it. I also happen to hate it when its disguised as self righteous justice against perceived wrongs.)
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
That's what our culture would have you believe, yep.
He's gonna tell us to check our privilege isn't he?
PhantomViper wrote: So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
I got more a vibe of “Racism is really a problem when it is done by the dominant group”. As in, in Japan, racism from Japaneses against Koreans is a real problem, but the other way, Koreans living in Japan hating on the Japanese, is not racism or something like this.
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
That's what our culture would have you believe, yep.
He's gonna tell us to check our privilege isn't he?
Nah, he's gonna tell us to take our privilege and burn it.
PhantomViper wrote: So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
I got more a vibe of “Racism is really a problem when it is done by the dominant group”. As in, in Japan, racism from Japaneses against Koreans is a real problem, but the other way, Koreans living in Japan hating on the Japanese, is not racism or something like this.
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Ahtman wrote: It would seem this is a situation where both the people responding to the picture are overreacting and the people in this thread are also overreacting. Good work.
I came to see straight white christian men yearning to throw off the shackles of oppression, I'm leaving satisfied.
Aren't you enlightened? I guess intolerance is actually a good thing, as long as its against white people. Two wrongs DO make a right.
(On a serious note, I hate racism and bigotry no matter where I find it. I also happen to hate it when its disguised as self righteous justice against perceived wrongs.)
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
Horse gak. Racism is racism, regardless of what group its directed at, and in all cases is equally vile. If you want to get rid of racism as a whole you go after it in all forms, you pussy-foot around because a particular version of it happens to be aimed at "the man."
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
So, a little racism is alright?
No. Wrong is wrong. People shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin. (It think Martin Luther King jr. said something about that.) If you go around worrying how you might offend some random stranger, you're probably living your life wrong. There's no constitutional protection against being offended. If you're doing something worthwhile, you're going to offend someone. Just be true to yourself, do what you think is right and don't worry about what some stranger says. Otherwise it'll be like living in a cage. That's what I love about America (and I've lived several other places) is that we're free to do as we please as long as it doesn't interfere on someone else's rights. If some one is offended because I wear something they think I shouldn't, too bad for them.
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
So, a little racism is alright?
No. Wrong is wrong. People shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin. (It think Martin Luther King jr. said something about that.) If you go around worrying how you might offend some random stranger, you're probably living your life wrong. There's no constitutional protection against being offended. If you're doing something worthwhile, you're going to offend someone. Just be true to yourself, do what you think is right and don't worry about what some stranger says. Otherwise it'll be like living in a cage. That's what I love about America (and I've lived several other places) is that we're free to do as we please as long as it doesn't interfere on someone else's rights. If some one is offended because I wear something they think I shouldn't, too bad for them.
Yeah there are people out there who'd get offended if I kissed another man in public but... what, am I supposed to just live my life how others tell me to? Where does it end, where does their influence end?
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
No rich people have most of the power in your society. They may or may not have the same skin color as you, but your as worthless to them as tits on a cow.
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: (long thought out post explaining that not all racism is equivalent in severity)
MWHistorian wrote:So, a little racism is alright?
Rainbow Dash wrote:so tldr...check our privilege?
And this is why every thread similar to this goes into the same sewer. There is never any point towards ever discussing stuff like this here because it always, 100% of the time, is going to be same same stew of intentional obtuseness and strawmen, spiced with the usual various buzzword bingo phrases like SJW, Tumblr, and check your privilege!!1!.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
Really? What power do you have?
What power do I have?
What power does Frazzled have? (Frazzled, not his weiner dogs, we know who has the true power there...)
You may want to swaddle yourself in imaginary "white guilt", but don't try to drown the rest of us in it.
MWHistorian wrote: If you go around worrying how you might offend some random stranger, you're probably living your life wrong. There's no constitutional protection against being offended. If you're doing something worthwhile, you're going to offend someone. Just be true to yourself, do what you think is right and don't worry about what some stranger says. Otherwise it'll be like living in a cage.
Well, there is a right measure for everything. Being constantly afraid is certainly wrong, but being always open to hear what other people have to say, trying to understand their point of view, and being ready to make efforts to make others more comfortable certainly is a good thing.
I have been wearing a Farahavar pendant for the last 14 years, I never feared any Iranian or Zoroastrian accusing me of cultural appropriation. If it did happen, I would talk to them about it to understand why they feel this way. But for the moment, it was more the opposite, they were either indifferent, or happy to find someone interested in their culture .
She. Try to listen to her first, and then disagree with her if you are still unconvinced .
I did. It's still crap.
(edit)
And here's why.
If the world's going to become a better place and racism comes to an end, it can't be excused because one side feels justified in their hatred somehow. All racists feel justified. The point is to end racism, not "okay it" for some, but not for others.
Well, drawing false equivalences muddies the issue. There are more in your post, here.
The fact is, white racism does more damage than prejudice against white people does because it's backed up by institutional power. White people have a ton more money, influence and cultural capital in the US, and in Australia, and presumably in most or all of the west. I'm white and I have a lot of trouble worrying that some people would find me putting my hair in box braids objectionable, in particular because my culture already says that how my hair looks naturally is great. This is part of how racism works - I'm already bombarded with images of people who look like me held up as ideals of how people should look. Meanwhile people of colour are growing up with that same ideal shoved in their faces all the time and feel bad for not being able to conform to it.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
So, a little racism is alright?
No. Wrong is wrong. People shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin. (It think Martin Luther King jr. said something about that.) If you go around worrying how you might offend some random stranger, you're probably living your life wrong. There's no constitutional protection against being offended. If you're doing something worthwhile, you're going to offend someone. Just be true to yourself, do what you think is right and don't worry about what some stranger says. Otherwise it'll be like living in a cage. That's what I love about America (and I've lived several other places) is that we're free to do as we please as long as it doesn't interfere on someone else's rights. If some one is offended because I wear something they think I shouldn't, too bad for them.
Well, as human beings with minds you and I are able to draw distinctions between different things and also notice differences in severity between different things. For example, we understand that, say, theft is a more minor offense than grievous bodily harm. By saying that GBH is worse than theft and should probably be treated more seriously, we're not saying that theft doesn't count or doesn't matter, we're just, essentially, making a judgment on where to place our resources. Similarly, if breaking my leg is worse than stubbing my toe, that doesn't mean I'm not going to go ouch and be really careful of the exercise bike's legs in future.
I want to talk a bit about offense, too, because white people have this really fascinating idea of "offense" as sort of this abstract thing that happens to people, like it's part of the weather or something. People aren't just "offended." When someone takes offense to something, it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
What power does Frazzled have? (Frazzled, not his weiner dogs, we know who has the true power there...)
You may want to swaddle yourself in imaginary "white guilt", but don't try to drown the rest of us in it.
Why should anyone care whether you, I or anyone else is guilty? It doesn't matter if you feel guilty - it benefits nobody. It does matter if you try and understand how racism works in our society so you can try and work against it yourself in whatever areas you're able.
Guilt is just another method for white people to re-center discussions of race on us, either by talking about how we shouldn't have to feel guilty or by talking about how guilty we do feel.
As a white person, people like me have most of the power in my society. Of course I'm not hurt as much by a marginalised person being prejudiced against me as they would be hurt by me being racist against them.
P.S. hi Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl!
Really? What power do you have?
What power do I have?
What power does Frazzled have? (Frazzled, not his weiner dogs, we know who has the true power there...)
You may want to swaddle yourself in imaginary "white guilt", but don't try to drown the rest of us in it.
I can destroy a toilet like no one's business, after a full plate of Mexican food?
In short:
- yeah, people reacted badly, and that sucks.
- but they're sensitive to it for a reason and you'll make the world a better place if you look into why cultural appropriation is terrible.
What if you "look into why cultural appropriation is terrible" and still think it's a nonsense? Maybe it's because I'm coming at this from the angle of the British left, in which the stress is(or has always been in my experience, I should say) on multiculturalism-as-cultural-fusion, and personally prefer the idea of culture in the form of voluntary association rather than something that runs in your blood, but despite reading all the reasons behind why people object I still find some of them ridiculous, many of them irrational, and almost all of them complete non-sequiturs. I cannot find the logical pathway between "America has historically had issues with racism" and "white people shouldn't wear certain hairstyles/perform music in certain ways/wear certain styles of dress" etc etc. I cannot find a rational argument that one culture or subculture adopting elements from other cultures and subcultures is bad, only that it's bad because it is. Or rather, it's bad when a dominant cultural group adopts elements from a non-dominant one.
But that's part of the process of cultural evolution, it's how culture grows and changes, how new subcultures form. We understand other cultures in part by adapting the parts of them which appeal to us into our own. You can't build a fortress wall around your particular strand of culture and demand everyone else leave it alone and inviolate, yet simultaneously demand it be respected and understood, because human intellect is fundamentally iterative; cultures that don't adapt, that don't share and "appropriate", stagnate, and stagnant cultures die.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: I want to talk a bit about offense, too, because white people have this really fascinating idea of "offense" as sort of this abstract thing that happens to people, like it's part of the weather or something. People aren't just "offended." When someone takes offense to something, it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
Like jazz, blues, rock and roll, … ?
Though here I guess we are talking black Americans. Things can pretty different in other countries.
it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
How are they being excluded from the culture exactly? Further its just revealed ignorance to say braids belong to any particular "culture." Every human civilization with hair has had braids. Heck I see old biker dudes with braids. Norse had braids. Ancient Han had braids. The idea is just ignorance by people who haven't opened a book ever but feel literate enough to venture an opinion.
(like me!)
Again, in the US everyone steals everyone's culture. Cajun food is the food of my people, but I don't get mad if damn yankees try to make it. Vodka and tequila are the drink of my people, but I don't mind if others partake.
Frazzled wrote: Further its just revealed ignorance to say braids belong to any particular "culture." Every human civilization with hair has had braids. Heck I see old biker dudes with braids. Norse had braids. Ancient Han had braids.
Yeah, but none of those looked like the one we see on the picture that caused the uproar. That one, I had almost exclusively seen on black people.
Frazzled wrote: Further its just revealed ignorance to say braids belong to any particular "culture." Every human civilization with hair has had braids. Heck I see old biker dudes with braids. Norse had braids. Ancient Han had braids.
Yeah, but none of those looked like the one we see on the picture that caused the uproar. That one, I had almost exclusively seen on black people.
only you youngins would say that. That hair style has been around for going on fifty years. Wow I feel old saying that.
Historically tacos were made by poor Northern Mexicans as a dish. Should they be mad the Taco Bell has appropriated this and that people of all colors now eat cat tacos?
I'll never forget what my TA/PHD candidate said
"you get to pretend you are the best parts of that culture, then take your costume off because you have privilidge"
He was saying that because you have privilege you can pretend you are part of a culture but not it's negatives.
sometimes I think he is right, but the I think about white teens acting gangsta thug.
In short:
- yeah, people reacted badly, and that sucks.
- but they're sensitive to it for a reason and you'll make the world a better place if you look into why cultural appropriation is terrible.
What if you "look into why cultural appropriation is terrible" and still think it's a nonsense? Maybe it's because I'm coming at this from the angle of the British left, in which the stress is(or has always been in my experience, I should say) on multiculturalism-as-cultural-fusion, and personally prefer the idea of culture in the form of voluntary association rather than something that runs in your blood, but despite reading all the reasons behind why people object I still find some of them ridiculous, many of them irrational, and almost all of them complete non-sequiturs. I cannot find the logical pathway between "America has historically had issues with racism" and "white people shouldn't wear certain hairstyles/perform music in certain ways/wear certain styles of dress" etc etc. I cannot find a rational argument that one culture or subculture adopting elements from other cultures and subcultures is bad, only that it's bad because it is. Or rather, it's bad when a dominant cultural group adopts elements from a non-dominant one.
But that's part of the process of cultural evolution, it's how culture grows and changes, how new subcultures form. We understand other cultures in part by adapting the parts of them which appeal to us into our own. You can't build a fortress wall around your particular strand of culture and demand everyone else leave it alone and inviolate, yet simultaneously demand it be respected and understood, because human intellect is fundamentally iterative; cultures that don't adapt, that don't share and "appropriate", stagnate, and stagnant cultures die.
Of course it's possible to disagree. I think you should have a strong understanding of what you're disagreeing with, though? I mean, I'm no authority on cultural appropriation, so I wouldn't suggest myself as a primary source.
I think part of the problem is when we culturally appropriate we tend to sort of pillage whatever culture for things we find appealing, then we repackage them in a way that's meaningful to white people and profit off them. Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense. Instead of an actual understanding of their culture we end up with a bastardised version, and then because white people have so much control over the overall culture the bastardised version swamps the authentic one?
I don't want to bring up the box braids because I think it's pretty universally agreed that box braids aren't the core issue, they're just spillover from people being pretty tender around the issue of appropriation.
it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
How are they being excluded from the culture exactly? Further its just revealed ignorance to say braids belong to any particular "culture." Every human civilization with hair has had braids. Heck I see old biker dudes with braids. Norse had braids. Ancient Han had braids. The idea is just ignorance by people who haven't opened a book ever but feel literate enough to venture an opinion.
(like me!)
Again, in the US everyone steals everyone's culture. Cajun food is the food of my people, but I don't get mad if damn yankees try to make it. Vodka and tequila are the drink of my people, but I don't mind if others partake.
We haven't shared our food or bagged milk with the rest of the world...
I think part of the problem is when we culturally appropriate we tend to sort of pillage whatever culture for things we find appealing, then we repackage them in a way that's meaningful to white people and profit off them. Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense. Instead of an actual understanding of their culture we end up with a bastardised version, and then because white people have so much control over the overall culture the bastardised version swamps the authentic one?
Whats the "authentic" vs. "inauthentic" versions? Please cite examples.
I want to talk a bit about offense, too, because white people have this really fascinating idea of "offense" as sort of this abstract thing that happens to people, like it's part of the weather or something. People aren't just "offended." When someone takes offense to something, it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
So you would be totally ok if a white piece of gak racist yelled at a 12 year old black girl for wearing a <insert name of boys band that 12 year old girls like here> t-shirt? Because she would be appropriating "white" culture?
Perhaps I'm a little behind the times, but I always took racism to mean;
- the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
or
- prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
When did the notions of "power" and "privilege" enter the discussion?
The phrase "cultural appropriation" makes me want to punch somebody in the face. Just another example that forced multiculturalism doesn't really work.
It's not about skin colour, it's about money. Money is power.
If this is a problem it's only because black celebrities have brought their culture to the mainstream. People emulate the rich and famous.
If we're wanting to continue with the sweeping generalisation theme, "White people", the thread has going then how about "Black people have a massive chip on their shoulder and should really learn to suck it up and get on with it".
I don't want to bring up the box braids because I think it's pretty universally agreed that box braids aren't the core issue, they're just spillover from people being pretty tender around the issue of appropriation.
Oh goody, another made up "issue" for the SJW croud to rally behind...
In short:
- yeah, people reacted badly, and that sucks.
- but they're sensitive to it for a reason and you'll make the world a better place if you look into why cultural appropriation is terrible.
What if you "look into why cultural appropriation is terrible" and still think it's a nonsense? Maybe it's because I'm coming at this from the angle of the British left, in which the stress is(or has always been in my experience, I should say) on multiculturalism-as-cultural-fusion, and personally prefer the idea of culture in the form of voluntary association rather than something that runs in your blood, but despite reading all the reasons behind why people object I still find some of them ridiculous, many of them irrational, and almost all of them complete non-sequiturs. I cannot find the logical pathway between "America has historically had issues with racism" and "white people shouldn't wear certain hairstyles/perform music in certain ways/wear certain styles of dress" etc etc. I cannot find a rational argument that one culture or subculture adopting elements from other cultures and subcultures is bad, only that it's bad because it is. Or rather, it's bad when a dominant cultural group adopts elements from a non-dominant one.
But that's part of the process of cultural evolution, it's how culture grows and changes, how new subcultures form. We understand other cultures in part by adapting the parts of them which appeal to us into our own. You can't build a fortress wall around your particular strand of culture and demand everyone else leave it alone and inviolate, yet simultaneously demand it be respected and understood, because human intellect is fundamentally iterative; cultures that don't adapt, that don't share and "appropriate", stagnate, and stagnant cultures die.
Of course it's possible to disagree. I think you should have a strong understanding of what you're disagreeing with, though? I mean, I'm no authority on cultural appropriation, so I wouldn't suggest myself as a primary source.
I think part of the problem is when we culturally appropriate we tend to sort of pillage whatever culture for things we find appealing, then we repackage them in a way that's meaningful to white people and profit off them. Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense. Instead of an actual understanding of their culture we end up with a bastardised version, and then because white people have so much control over the overall culture the bastardised version swamps the authentic one?
I don't want to bring up the box braids because I think it's pretty universally agreed that box braids aren't the core issue, they're just spillover from people being pretty tender around the issue of appropriation.
I don't see it that way. The issue I have with the idea of cultural appropriation is that it mixes up a big bowl of subjective value judgements almost all drawn from a very narrow subset of human history(chiefly the last 50 years) and uses that to condemn the basic "operating system" that allows culture to exist and function. What is happening now is no different to what has always happened, like everything else in modernity the only difference is the speed and global nature of the changes.
There is always a single dominant culture in a particular scenario(regional, racial etc). That culture spawns subcultures which grow up around niche lifestyles, opinions, tastes etc which are not catered to by the dominant culture, and in turn the dominant culture perpetually adapts itself by integrating elements of new cultures it encounters and subcultures it has spawned in order to maintain relevance to as many people as possible. The moment a culture stops adapting, it begins spiralling into irrelevance; because it does not adopt new elements the rate that subcultures are generated increases dramatically, and eventually one of those subcultures, one which is still prepared to adapt and expand to maximise its relevance to the most people, overtakes the old culture and becomes the new dominant culture, the old one either dying off entirely or becoming a generation-dependent subculture that subsists on nostalgia, until it finally sinks into obscurity and is in-turn stripped of interesting elements by the new dominant culture and the larger subcultures.
There is no absolute standard of "authenticity"; all cultures, whether presently dominant or considered subcultures of a larger cultural entity, engage in the same process. Modern "black culture" in America appropriates elements of various African cultures, historical and contemporary, and has various subcultures of its own, just as modern "American culture" borrows elements from black culture, southern culture, latin American culture, European culture etc etc etc. "Cultural Appropriation" appears to be to be a pseudo-academic construct designed to justify an odd sense of petulant selfishness - it is perhaps understandable, given the historical context("your people were mean to my people, so you can't use my stuff!"), but that doesn't make it justifiable, nor does it make it a valid critique of culture as a concept.
As for understanding; "appropriating" elements of other cultures and subcultures may not lead to absolute understanding on the part of participants in the dominant culture, but it is still one of the main methods by which one culture relates to another and build empathy with one another, and so imperfect as it may be I believe some unspecified but reasonably substantial non-zero value of understanding is superior to no understanding at all.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: I think part of the problem is when we culturally appropriate we tend to sort of pillage whatever culture for things we find appealing, then we repackage them in a way that's meaningful to white people and profit off them. Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense. Instead of an actual understanding of their culture we end up with a bastardised version, and then because white people have so much control over the overall culture the bastardised version swamps the authentic one?
If you remove the italic part, it is just how I feel about a bunch of Japanese stuff. Like this .
Truth been told, though, the Japanese, and arguably the west too, tends to do the same with their own cultures some a few hundreds years ago. Taking it and twisting it completely to fit into some fantasized new version.
About every goddamn hollywood blockbuster which involves Greek mythology twist it so wickedly I HATE it.
If you remove the italic part, it is just how I feel about a bunch of Japanese stuff. Like this .
Truth been told, though, the Japanese, and arguably the west too, tends to do the same with their own cultures some a few hundreds years ago. Taking it and twisting it completely to fit into some fantasized new version.
About every goddamn hollywood blockbuster which involves Greek mythology twist it so wickedly I HATE it.
That is because everybody does that, its part of the process how cultures evolve and its a fundamental part of our evolution as a species.
PhantomViper wrote: That is because everybody does that, its part of the process how cultures evolve and its a fundamental part of our evolution as a species.
Well, there is doing it well (Hellboy?), and then there is Hollywood/whatever the name is for Japan .
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
The "expense" part there can be hard to understand. For example, anime constantly appropriates and mangles Christian concepts and imagery. At what expense to Christians (in Japan or otherwise)? What expense is leveled on black people when white people adopt "black" hairstyles? (To be clear, these are non-rhetorical questions.)
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
The "expense" part there can be hard to understand. For example, anime constantly appropriates and mangles Christian concepts and imagery. At what expense to Christians (in Japan or otherwise)? What expense is leveled on black people when white people adopt "black" hairstyles? (To be clear, these are non-rhetorical questions.)
There are those who feel 'westerners' cannot do COSPLAY as it is basically dressing up in 'blackface' but for asian people since most anime characters are intended to be asians. It offends them and is seen as racist to them.
Someone will always find a problem with everything. The thing about this news story is there were a large number of people who said 'there is nothing wrong' which gives me hope in this world.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
The "expense" part there can be hard to understand. For example, anime constantly appropriates and mangles Christian concepts and imagery. At what expense to Christians (in Japan or otherwise)? What expense is leveled on black people when white people adopt "black" hairstyles? (To be clear, these are non-rhetorical questions.)
There are those who feel 'westerners' cannot do COSPLAY as it is basically dressing up in 'blackface' but for asian people since most anime characters are intended to be asians. It offends them and is seen as racist to them.
Someone will always find a problem with everything. The thing about this news story is there were a large number of people who said 'there is nothing wrong' which gives me hope in this world.
Which I find funny because 90% of anime characters don't look Japanese at all to me, and I've met quite a few Japanese. And there are plenty of Anime set in a western setting or with characters who are explicitly non-japanese, and they look little different from the other characters.
nkelsch wrote: There are those who feel 'westerners' cannot do COSPLAY as it is basically dressing up in 'blackface' but for asian people since most anime characters are intended to be asians. It offends them and is seen as racist to them.
As with every cosplay problem, the solution is the same. Cosplay as Deadpool cosplaying as whatever character you want. Problem solved!
As an asian living in Singapore who has travelled extensively around the world,(like 2x a year for 10+ years to europe alone, not including other parts of asia, america etc) cultural appropriation is such utter bs. This would be like me complaining that chinese food served in the majority of chinese restaurants in non-chinese countries don't taste like what I'm used to at home. Guess what? People have different tastes, and in this globalised world, they adapt them to their environment. If you don't like it, go stay at home.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Perhaps I'm a little behind the times, but I always took racism to mean;
- the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
or
- prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
When did the notions of "power" and "privilege" enter the discussion?
It's something I've seen before and I thought it was pretty weird when I first encountered it too. It was coming from people I respect, so I've been trying to wrap my head around what's going on there. I think it's born out of what often bubbles up in these sort of discussions where some people refuse to acknowledge that not all racism is created equal. Some people will argue that, since racism is bad, that all racism is equally bad, and 'you can't just address racism against one group, without talking about/addressing all racism'. Which is usually a furfy designed to distract from, and derail the actual discussion. This has lead some to redefine racism as only being 'Racism' when it is systemic (or practised by a society rather than individuals). This also seems to happen with other 'ism's.
Plus I think the whole racist-as-insult thing plays a role as well, though I'm hazy on that one.
Honestly I don't think it is a very good tactic, it generally just seems to lead to more confusion and talking at cross purposes, but YMMV.
I'm aware that humans originally came out of africa, and i subscribe to the one drop theory (thank you halle berry). Therefore, this isn't racism, it's just another story of black on black hatred/violence.
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
yup pretty much what plastic is saying,
sad thing is plastic probably believes every bit of it, and honestly sees no racism in it.
every time you eat pasta? YOU ARE RACIST AGAINST ASIANS! how dare you besmirch us with your inferior cosplay!
I mean noodles!
Part of not being a racist is accepting other cultures, part of not being a racist is embracing, accepting, and often emulating other cultures, and accepting that your culture in turn will be accepted, embraced, and often emulated.
I want to talk a bit about offense, too, because white people have this really fascinating idea of "offense" as sort of this abstract thing that happens to people, like it's part of the weather or something. People aren't just "offended." When someone takes offense to something, it's usually for a particular reason. In the case of the box braids, there's a pattern of, essentially, black people being shut out of mainstream culture, creating their own culture in response, then having part of that culture taken by white people, ripped out and turned into a generic, white thing that black people are again excluded from.
So you would be totally ok if a white piece of gak racist yelled at a 12 year old black girl for wearing a <insert name of boys band that 12 year old girls like here> t-shirt? Because she would be appropriating "white" culture?
Probably any black person wearing any sort of NBA apparel, really...
Think about it. Basketball was created by a WHITE rugby coach who wanted something for his rugby players (in the US at that time, this was predominately a WHITE past-time) to do in the winter.... It has since been "stolen" by "black culture" and now white people are basically excluded from the very thing that they created, which was "culturally appropriated" by another group
Pendix wrote: It's something I've seen before and I thought it was pretty weird when I first encountered it too. It was coming from people I respect, so I've been trying to wrap my head around what's going on there. I think it's born out of what often bubbles up in these sort of discussions where some people refuse to acknowledge that not all racism is created equal. Some people will argue that, since racism is bad, that all racism is equally bad, and 'you can't just address racism against one group, without talking about/addressing all racism'. Which is usually a furfy designed to distract from, and derail the actual discussion. This has lead some to redefine racism as only being 'Racism' when it is systemic (or practised by a society rather than individuals). This also seems to happen with other 'ism's.
Plus I think the whole racist-as-insult thing plays a role as well, though I'm hazy on that one.
Honestly I don't think it is a very good tactic, it generally just seems to lead to more confusion and talking at cross purposes, but YMMV.
This is what I see as the problem. By distorting what is meant by racism it shuts down any honest discussion on the topic. What we have instead is the situation that Group X cannot have an opinion about Group Y because Group X has been told by Y that they have privilege, and must check their privilege at every opportunity. Meanwhile Group Y can have an opinion about Group X because they claim not to have privilege. It seems like an all too convenient way to shift the goalposts, and is more antagonistic than helpful.
Being told "check your privilege" doesn't cancel out your privilege. No one can keep you from enjoying advantages due to race, gender, sexuality, etc., just by pointing out that you enjoy them.
And I will continue to enjoy my privilidge all the way to the financial aid office while walking there because I dont have a car because mine broke down and I didnt have to 5g to fix.
Im so priviledged
hotsauceman1 wrote: And I will continue to enjoy my privilidge all the way to the financial aid office while walking there because I dont have a car because mine broke down and I didnt have to 5g to fix.
Im so priviledged
Sounds like a personnel issue then a privilege issue
Is it time for me to come in yet and declare the stupid people should be sterilized? Really, calling a 12 year old girl a racist because she liked the hairstyle...everyone attacking her should be sterilized. Or sent into space without oxygen. Whichever. I don't care what color skin the have: stupidity comes in all shades.
Manchu wrote: Being told "check your privilege" doesn't cancel out your privilege. No one can keep you from enjoying advantages due to race, gender, sexuality, etc., just by pointing out that you enjoy them.
Mmm privilege. Having thought about that a lot since the last time we tangled I remembered Frazzled Sr's thoughts once. As a reminder Frazzled Sr. grew up so poor he and his brother were put in an orphanage to keep from starving for several years. He grew up picking cotton as a boy etc. etc. He had it rough. But he thought if he had been a black boy who grew up in the same circumstances, he would have had it even worse. Thats privilege even for poor folk.
The problem is, most folks look around and see that they aren't privileged compared to the next guy, and that often the ones shouting "privilege" grew up in circumstance substantially better than theirs and that chaps their hide. Thats why privilege is wrong for many people.
So both sides can be right. We should realize systematic differences could give a group a disadvantage, but that other factors also provide similar disadvantage/advantage for individuals or groups, and the people screaming privilege should watch who they are saying it to.
Here endeth the lesson. For my next gig I'llbe making these five rolls of French Bread and five bottles of Paylat last for everyone in the entire party...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
timetowaste85 wrote: Is it time for me to come in yet and declare the stupid people should be sterilized? Really, calling a 12 year old girl a racist because she liked the hairstyle...everyone attacking her should be sterilized. Or sent into space without oxygen. Whichever. I don't care what color skin the have: stupidity comes in all shades.
I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
The girly hair is canceled if you are wearing a kilt
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
Well if you wove slow burning matches into those braids you'd be pretty cool....
Manchu wrote: Being told "check your privilege" doesn't cancel out your privilege. No one can keep you from enjoying advantages due to race, gender, sexuality, etc., just by pointing out that you enjoy them.
Mmm privilege. Having thought about that a lot since the last time we tangled I remembered Frazzled Sr's thoughts once. As a reminder Frazzled Sr. grew up so poor he and his brother were put in an orphanage to keep from starving for several years. He grew up picking cotton as a boy etc. etc. He had it rough. But he thought if he had been a black boy who grew up in the same circumstances, he would have had it even worse. Thats privilege even for poor folk.
The problem is, most folks look around and see that they aren't privileged compared to the next guy, and that often the ones shouting "privilege" grew up in circumstance substantially better than theirs and that chaps their hide. Thats why privilege is wrong for many people.
So both sides can be right. We should realize systematic differences could give a group a disadvantage, but that other factors also provide similar disadvantage/advantage for individuals or groups, and the people screaming privilege should watch who they are saying it to.
Here endeth the lesson. For my next gig I'llbe making these five rolls of French Bread and five bottles of Paylat last for everyone in the entire party...
Wow.........an ensightfull post that acknowledges both sides have a valid point of view and they their is no right answer.
What is this doing on dakka?
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
Well if you wove slow burning matches into those braids you'd be pretty cool....
No no no. That'll only make it worse. Then he's got dreads, girly hair, and he's flaming! He'll offend women, non-whites, and the LGBT community!
Manchu wrote: Being told "check your privilege" doesn't cancel out your privilege. No one can keep you from enjoying advantages due to race, gender, sexuality, etc., just by pointing out that you enjoy them.
People who assert that systemic racism being prevalent in the systems of western civilization *today* to the degree where white people still enjoy special systemically legalized privilege are not "pointing out a fact" to people.
They are asserting that systemic racism being prevalent in the systems of western civilization *today* to the degree where white people still enjoy special systemically legalized privilege. Which is not only their own opinion, but it forces that opinion on the person they accuse because it forces them to be (knowingly or not) part of this inherently systematically racist system.
You are presenting your opinion on that assertion as a matter fact, as opposed to acknowledging that its actually forcing an opinion on everyone else at the same time.
Anyone who claims your assertion you claim is wrong simply because they dont know about their privilege.
By doing this, you shut down any and all legitimate debate, because its not even a matter of argument anymore if everyone else's opinion is forced upon them through their "subconscious support for the good ole white boys only club" they wont "know any better" anyways.
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
Well if you wove slow burning matches into those braids you'd be pretty cool....
No no no. That'll only make it worse. Then he's got dreads, girly hair, and he's flaming! He'll offend women, non-whites, and the LGBT community!
Racism isn't a two-way thing. I mean, people of colour can hate white people and say mean things about white people, sure, but it's not equal because the levels of institutional power behind them are different. For example, white people in the US have vastly more economic power than any other racial group. If a black person is prejudiced against white people, they're at a massive economic disadvantage, whereas a white person prejudiced against black people is not. That's one example, but you can imagine it in terms of culture or whatever if you want, too. If you want to avoid "black culture" in the US then you'll find that a lot easier and less restrictive than avoiding "white culture."
That's why a lot of people avoid using the term "racism" to refer to prejudice against the privileged group - it doesn't have the same impact and it does a disservice to equate the two.
So what you are saying is that racism is only a bad thing if its done by whites? Any other skin colour and you can be racist all you wan't?
yup pretty much what plastic is saying,
Seriously, reading comprehension. Where is the claim you're saying is being made being made?
Manchu wrote: Being told "check your privilege" doesn't cancel out your privilege. No one can keep you from enjoying advantages due to race, gender, sexuality, etc., just by pointing out that you enjoy them.
People who assert that systemic racism being prevalent in the systems of western civilization *today* to the degree where white people still enjoy special systemically legalized are not "pointing out a fact" to people.
They are asserting that systemic racism being prevalent in the systems of western civilization *today* to the degree where white people still enjoy special systemically legalized privilege. Which is not only their own opinion, but it forces that opinion on the person they accuse because it forces them to be (knowingly or not) part of this inherently systematically racist system.
You are presenting your opinion on that assertion as a matter fact, as opposed to acknowledging that its actually forcing an opinion on everyone else at the same time.
Anyone who claims your assertion you claim is wrong simply because they dont know about their privilege.
By doing this, you shut down any and all legitimate debate, because its not even a matter of argument anymore if everyone eases opinion is forced upon them through their "subconscious support for the good ole white boys only club"
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm a white guy and have hair down to the middle of my back. When I LARP as one of my characters, I have my wife braid my entire head into 4 giant cornrows, and then pull everything into a ponytail.
I must be super-racist, and have wussy girl's hair as well.
Well if you wove slow burning matches into those braids you'd be pretty cool....
No no no. That'll only make it worse. Then he's got dreads, girly hair, and he's flaming! He'll offend women, non-whites, and the LGBT community!
WONT SOMEONE THING OF THE CHILDREN!
Anyone ever notice that kids are never offended? Its like being offended is a learned opprotunity.
Debate or not, at the end of the day I still enjoy the privileges of being white, male, cis-, and straight. Getting to choose whether I even care about the debate getting shut down or whatever is actually one of my privileges.
Debate or not, at the end of the day I still enjoy the privileges of being white, male, cis-, and straight. Getting to choose whether I even care about the debate getting shut down or whatever is actually one of my privileges.
hotsauceman1 wrote: It means you associate with the gender you are born with. Normal basically
Interestin thing, it is also not an official term, its made up.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sining wrote: It's a fancy word tumblrinas came up with to mean straight people
Debate or not, at the end of the day I still enjoy the privileges of being white, male, cis-, and straight. Getting to choose whether I even care about the debate getting shut down or whatever is actually one of my privileges.
Whats "cis"?
Confederacy of Independent Systems
Formed by the Galactic Republic, Trade Federation, InterGalactic Banking Clan, Techno Union, Commerce Guild, Corporate Alliance and others.
CIS people can generally be found trying to increase their wealth, fighting trade agreements and killing clones of the republic.
Our privileges are droid servants, the future prospect of a Death Star to get what we want and evil bad guys to scare children.
Swastakowey wrote: CIS people can generally be found trying to increase their wealth, fighting trade agreements and killing clones of the republic.
Two out of three, maybe even all three. I'd have to check with GOP HQ but I am pretty sure we White People oppose cloning. Maybe not for armies though, tough one.
Debate or not, at the end of the day I still enjoy the privileges of being white, male, cis-, and straight. Getting to choose whether I even care about the debate getting shut down or whatever is actually one of my privileges.
That assertion would hinge on non straight, non white, non cis ect people having no agency and cannot think for themselves enough to not care about the debate.
Being able to think freely is not a white male privilege, it never was, even back when actual white privilege was a thing
but again, your post simply states your opinion as fact with no debate allowed or possible because Im an unconscious participant by default.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And I will continue to enjoy my privilidge all the way to the financial aid office while walking there because I dont have a car because mine broke down and I didnt have to 5g to fix.
Im so priviledged
Oh man I'm so glad I didn't miss your threadly example of completely misunderstanding what the concept is in a pathetic attempt to try show it doesn't exist.
You could educate yourself instead? About 80% of American millionaires are self made. They aren't trust-fund babies.
I'll refer you back to Capital in the Twenty-First Century. I'll also go ahead and ask if you have any other sources for that claim, seeing as CATO exists to promote free-market capitalism at all costs.
Debate or not, at the end of the day I still enjoy the privileges of being white, male, cis-, and straight. Getting to choose whether I even care about the debate getting shut down or whatever is actually one of my privileges.
I think part of the problem is when we culturally appropriate we tend to sort of pillage whatever culture for things we find appealing, then we repackage them in a way that's meaningful to white people and profit off them. Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense. Instead of an actual understanding of their culture we end up with a bastardised version, and then because white people have so much control over the overall culture the bastardised version swamps the authentic one?
I don't want to bring up the box braids because I think it's pretty universally agreed that box braids aren't the core issue, they're just spillover from people being pretty tender around the issue of appropriation.
And there was I thinking appropriation is a good thing, imitation is flattery. Personally i think it's cool when some white imperialist wears a kimono, but apparently thats bad, stick to pilgrim clothes , that's the only way to be safe on tumblr.
Manchu wrote: Two out of three, maybe even all three. I'd have to check with GOP HQ but I am pretty sure we White People oppose cloning. Maybe not for armies though, tough one.
Sorry, it seems armies are an acceptable use of cloning
Manchu wrote: Two out of three, maybe even all three. I'd have to check with GOP HQ but I am pretty sure we White People oppose cloning. Maybe not for armies though, tough one.
Sorry, it seems armies are an acceptable use of cloning
CIS have the droid armies mate. Republic are just a bunch of minorities banded together we want to oppress.
easysauce wrote: but again, your post simply states your opinion as fact with no debate allowed or possible because Im an unconscious participant by default.
Oh hey, it's that thing where you simultaneously complain about something whilst doing that exact same thing!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sining wrote: It's a fancy word tumblrinas came up with to mean straight people
Hey, maybe before making a cool, edgy and dismissive comment about how Tumblr sucks, you could make sure that what you're saying is actually correct? Because the word that people (yes, including Tumblr) use to describe straight people is... Straight people. Cis is used to refer to non-trans people (based of the chemical structure naming convention), and no, it wasn't thought up by Tumblr.
easysauce wrote: but again, your post simply states your opinion as fact with no debate allowed or possible because Im an unconscious participant by default.
Oh hey, it's that thing where you simultaneously complain about something whilst doing that exact same thing!
So then it should be no trouble quote me where I told anyone they were wrong because they unconsciously were supporting my opinion.
easysauce wrote: but again, your post simply states your opinion as fact with no debate allowed or possible because Im an unconscious participant by default.
Oh hey, it's that thing where you simultaneously complain about something whilst doing that exact same thing!
So then it should be no trouble quote me where I told anyone they were wrong because they unconsciously were supporting my opinion.
I was actually commenting on your continual accusations that other people are presenting opinions as facts, whilst simultaneously making sweeping, opinion based claims and presenting them as facts.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
Prove it. I'm serious. Show how brading one's hair (or eating the food of another culture, or learning another language, or dressing in clothing from another culture) enriches "us" at the expense of the "other"?
Manchu wrote: What do people think of GamerGate as a case of white males being sensitive about cultural appropriation?
Given all the minorities and women that support #GamerGate, and how #GamerGate only has something to do with race/gender if you don't understand it/buy into the lies of the pathetic websites that peddle that narrative (Kotaku, Polygon, anything Gawker), I'm gonna go ahead and say "Not much!".
I'll tell you how, by copying something from anoither culture does, we steal it and make it our own thereby taking something from them permanently. It can only be bad for society when people from other cultures do things like other cultures in a society.
WE cannot have people melding into one, we must keep things separate and different so we all have a reason to be righteously indignant! Some people are so ignant
A scientific term that has feth all to do with gender that was culturally appropriated (or rather, misappropriated) by the Tumblr crowd and is now used as a gender-based slur against anyone who's a man who says they're a man, or a woman who says they're a woman.
A scientific term that has feth all to do with gender that was culturally appropriated (or rather, misappropriated) by the Tumblr crowd and is now used as a gender-based slur against anyone who's a man who says they're a man, or a woman who says they're a woman.
You know how people already explained the actual origin? Could we have more of that, and less of... whatever your post is?
You know how you (rightly) always complain that people use "check your privilege!" to derail discussions? I'm kinda thinking that if you want less of that, you could start by not doing it yourself.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: You know how you (rightly) always complain that people use "check your privilege!" to derail discussions? I'm kinda thinking that if you want less of that, you could start by not doing it yourself.
But if the same three or four people don't show up in every single thread where people are trying to have a vaguely serious(and usually fairly civil until their arrival) discussion to explain things to us, how will anyone know that tumblr is full of silly people and so by extension any time anyone on tumblr expresses an opinion about a subject they immediately discredit every possible argument that ever has been, is being, or will be made by anybody ever regarding the same subject?
Yodhrin wrote: But if the same three or four people don't show up in every single thread where people are trying to have a vaguely serious(and usually fairly civil until their arrival) discussion to explain things to us, how will anyone know that tumblr is full of silly people and so by extension any time anyone on tumblr expresses an opinion about a subject they immediately discredit every possible argument that ever has been, is being, or will be made by anybody ever regarding the same subject?
When the discussion starts with "Are braids in your hair racist?", I think we're beyond the point of ever taking it seriously. Hell, I'd argue that taking it seriously lends weight/credence to their nonsense ideas. Ridicule is the only refuge, as to treat it seriously for even a second leads down a path of madness and microaggressions.
Well yes. They whine about the infinitely trivial, treating it as if society itself was ready to collapse. How can one react but with amusement or bemusement?
I'm late to the clusterfeth, but remind me how cultural appropriation is a bad thing. I didn't see anyone actually cover that in before things went bizarre, and "Western Appreciation of Anime is Racist Guy" never really was very articulate about it.
Well yes. They whine about the infinitely trivial, treating it as if society itself was ready to collapse. How can one react but with amusement or bemusement?
I was actually talking to one of the most liberal guys I can stand to call a friend earlier, and I'm pretty liberal according to Dakka, but he described SJWs without actually using that term, and cited that as basically the reason as why we were becoming more conservative in a lot of ways, and then twitched in a strange way when I used the term later in the conversation. I mean little by mentioning this. Just an anecdote.
If you are implying that the term "SJW" isn't helpful, then I'd have to agree. It's yet again another label, and all it does is divide us. Perhaps it would be better to ascribe it to a pattern of behaviour, rather than a group of people that hang out in a certain place (Tumblr/US College campuses).
daedalus wrote: I'm late to the clusterfeth, but remind me how cultural appropriation is a bad thing. I didn't see anyone actually cover that in before things went bizarre, and "Western Appreciation of Anime is Racist Guy" never really was very articulate about it.
As always, it's a matter of degree. In the middle you have normal interaction with other cultures. I go to an Italian restaurant. You visit India. Ouze learns Swahili. Yodhrin learns origami. And so on.
Then you have the two extremes, where people take things from one persons culture, make it their own, and in a way stamp out the culture it came from. This is a very colonialistic (if that's a word) thing. Then you have the opposite extreme, the people who believe that doing anything from any other culture beyond your own is "cultural appropriation", so me going to that Italian restaurant, your visit to India, Ouze's desire to talk Swahili and Yodran's eagerness to fold paper into pretty objects is seen as bad, as wiping away the cultures they're from and, or course, the old standby, racism.
Well, that's the thing, I wasn't really trying to imply anything. Really just babbling about something that happened mere hours ago that seemed vaguely relevant. You hit on an interesting point though: We apparently try to be divisive. That's the core takeaway of everything for me. In the old days, it was a fad to embrace not where you were born, but where people 6-7 generations from you came from. You were so lucky to declare you were 1/16 Cherokee or whatever. You were proud to declare yourself Scottish, even if you only strongly traced yourself back to it among all the German and English in you, by god, it's a thing. Or one of the other two, whichever you cherry-picked, it's a badge of honor derived from a pedigree actually honored as a bumper sticker slogan; essentially meaningless. Perhaps part of the problem is that it somehow cheapens the originating culture? Or, perhaps somehow ever person claiming it cheapens the bumper sticker slogan of someone with stronger ties to it. I don't know. I don't get people.
I recently learned how to make paneer. I did so not because I want to subvert Indian culture, but because it's goddamned delicious, and I cherish the spread of knowledge. I'd happily share that knowledge with anyone who cared, as I would with any knowledge I might happen to have, and consider it an honor to be able to teach someone. Universal understanding is really the only thing that matters to me. I wonder about people who seemingly WANT to be segregated.
And I mean, if we stuck to cultural inventions based upon our skin color, how much would that suck for everyone? Literally everyone? I'd be eating gak food, people would be dying due to lack of modern medicine, and we'd all be even more distrustful and hateful of everyone that we already are behind the masquerade of smiley gladhandedness, which would even be strained due to our inability to relate to each other. Human interaction is based the feth on sharing experiences. How the hell do you relate to the guy next to you if you can't break bread/share beer/talk the same language? Please tell me someone is wrong here, because it sounds like human beings are advocating a return to the dark ages.
H.B.M.C. wrote:Well yes. They whine about the infinitely trivial, treating it as if society itself was ready to collapse. How can one react but with amusement or bemusement?
I know, they make posts complaining about things that happened on twitter, they talk as if SJWs are some sort of pervasive threat to civilised culture... wait, what were you talking about?
H.B.M.C. wrote:Check your privilege!
Ugh, I hate how SJWs middle aged guys on the internet use that phrase to derail conversations and shut down meaningful discussion. Every time a topic comes up on Dakka, those pesky SJWs middle aged guys just respond with "Check your privelege!" As if it's some sort of magic bullet argument that no-one is allowed to respond to.
Yodhrin wrote: But if the same three or four people don't show up in every single thread where people are trying to have a vaguely serious(and usually fairly civil until their arrival) discussion to explain things to us, how will anyone know that tumblr is full of silly people and so by extension any time anyone on tumblr expresses an opinion about a subject they immediately discredit every possible argument that ever has been, is being, or will be made by anybody ever regarding the same subject?
When the discussion starts with "Are braids in your hair racist?", I think we're beyond the point of ever taking it seriously. Hell, I'd argue that taking it seriously lends weight/credence to their nonsense ideas. Ridicule is the only refuge, as to treat it seriously for even a second leads down a path of madness and microaggressions.
But if you notice, we pretty quickly moved past that in this thread and began, quite civilly, discussing the broader question, and even the primary person arguing in favour of the concept at issue has said on a couple of occasions that the reaction in the original story was daft and the hair thing is silly. I would suggest that if you think the topic is stupid, and that engaging with it is stupid, you say to yourself "this is stupid" and toddle off? You don't get "[led] down a path of madness and microaggressions", and the rest of us can enjoy our conversation without the same few people visiting every thread to let us know you still think exactly the same thing you did in the last five threads.
Well yes. They whine about the infinitely trivial, treating it as if society itself was ready to collapse. How can one react but with amusement or bemusement?
One can react however they like. It just seems that you and the others who feel the need to bring it up constantly whether there are any actual "SJWs" whining about trivial things in the actual thread or not, are starting to sound a lot like that particular brand of atheist who feels the need to post a screed about how bad the Westboro Baptist Church are in any thread that mentions the word "religion", whether it's relevant or not. Because that is who we're talking about here; fringe nutters, people who take already contentious and fringe academic concepts, wash them down with a liberal glass of misunderstanding, and then vomit the resulting hyperbole all over one online community(that isn't this one), and are discussed outside of that community online almost exclusively in terms of ridicule.
In short; it was funny the first few times, mildly amusing a few times after that, but it's boring now and serves only to derail every single topic you lot feel the need to involve it in. We all know your view, and almost everyone agrees with it to one degree or another. Please, as a favour, give it a rest for a while?
If you have worthwhile to contribute to the thread -- and posts that consist of a single "hilarious" image do not fill the criteria -- then it's better you don't post at all.
Sining wrote: So what you're saying is you need a safe space on a public internet forum where people aren't allowed to disagree or mock you.
Because, as always, it must come down to 'we're all so offended' and not 'we're trying to have a civilised discussion and you* keep on contributing with the intellectual equivalent of running into a room, farting and running away'.
I'm more than open to hearing other people's opinions, it's why I come into these threads time and time again. The issue is when there's an attempt at hearing one another's opinions, and 'certain posters' 'contribute' by making posts that consist entirely of asinine buzzwords, making comments about people being needlessly offended when they object to something, or generally try to shut the discussion down, not because they disagree with people's argument, but because in their opinion there shouldn't be a discussion at all.
That's why these threads always end badly.
*you is in the plural here, it is not aimed specifically at Sining.
Sining wrote: So what you're saying is you need a safe space on a public internet forum where people aren't allowed to disagree or mock you.
Because, as always, it must come down to 'we're all so offended' and not 'we're trying to have a civilised discussion and you* keep on contributing with the intellectual equivalent of running into a room, farting and running away'.
I'm more than open to hearing other people's opinions, it's why I come into these threads time and time again. The issue is when there's an attempt at hearing one another's opinions, and 'certain posters' 'contribute' by making posts that consist entirely of asinine buzzwords, making comments about people being needlessly offended when they object to something, or generally try to shut the discussion down, not because they disagree with people's argument, but because in their opinion there shouldn't be a discussion at all.
That's why these threads always end badly.
*you is in the plural here, it is not aimed specifically at Sining.
Maybe those people think that even discussing those opinions is equal to giving them a degree of legitimacy that they do not deserve? And that mocking those opinions is the only real way to demonstrate their sheer absurdity in the current world?
Goliath, those are their opinions. While yours are just to come in and complain about the people who don't feel cultural appropriation is a thing. I mean apparently I wouldn't wear jeans cause Asians certainly didn't invent them. We just mass produce them now
I just put on my mix of classics that I enjoy on shuffle, and at song 2 a thought popped up: If braiding your hair is bad, how much worse would the people complaining about that consider the Blues Brothers to be?
Also, as someone who speaks five languages (6 if you count my local dialect which is pretty much incomprehensible to people who speak only proper Dutch and admittedly only 3 fluently), I cannot for the life of me figure out how speaking more than one language is a bad thing, even for the people who you can now communicate with in their own tongue?
That's not even counting how speaking a different language teaches you new and different thought patterns.
I live in southern California right on the border (hopefully not much longer though as I'm planning on moving to Arizona in summer) and I don't see any white privilege here. Plenty of hispanic and middle eastern privilege though.
Cis is a term used by people in place of "Normal" because it means that just because you where born "Trans" you are normal and no different from someone born "Cis"
I have no problem with is being used that way. Hell in chemistry there are Trans/Cis terms
The problem I have, people use it as a way to shut down arguments and say your opinion has no validity because you identify as cis.
EDIT: Ok, it cuts the word completely (doesn't even replace it). I think that's fine. Better to cut it. I can't imagine what a good "replacement" would be for that particular word anyway.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: You know how people already explained the actual origin? Could we have more of that, and less of... whatever your post is?
Check your privilege!
Don't you openly portray yourself as a representative for a large board game manufacturer? How do you get away with using your employer's name on the same site on which you wade into drama at maximum abrasiveness?
Seriously, I want to know so I can be my online self with my real life name and not end up unemployed.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Don't you openly portray yourself as a representative for a large board game manufacturer? How do you get away with using your employer's name on the same site on which you wade into drama at maximum abrasiveness?
He has a disclaimer saying he is not. Just like me! Look at mine! What I am saying is in no way on behalf of Games Workshop. Do not make that easy mistake to take what I say as being said on behalf of Games Workshop, please! Because it might sound very reasonable to assume I speak on behalf of Games Workshop, but I do not. That is just not true.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Don't you openly portray yourself as a representative for a large board game manufacturer? How do you get away with using your employer's name on the same site on which you wade into drama at maximum abrasiveness?
He has a disclaimer saying he is not. Just like me! Look at mine! What I am saying is in no way on behalf of Games Workshop. Do not make that easy mistake to take what I say as being said on behalf of Games Workshop, please! Because it might sound very reasonable to assume I speak on behalf of Games Workshop, but I do not. That is just not true.
Yeah, okay, but every employment contract or employee handbook I've ever had has pretty much included a clause that prevents a personal disclaimer from protecting the employee from termination.
For example, no matter how many times I say my opinions online don't represent Union Carbide, except in all the threads where we talk about carbide or unions, if I ever posted, say, "I'm tired of short justice waddlers getting mad at folks for putting shoes on my knees and calling myself a dorf," my ass would be grass. Even if I had a really big disclaimer.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: For example, no matter how many times I say my opinions online don't represent Union Carbide, except in all the threads where we talk about carbide or unions, if I ever posted, say, "I'm tired of short justice waddlers getting mad at folks for putting shoes on my knees and calling myself a dorf," my ass would be grass. Even if I had a really big disclaimer.
Only if people knew and cared about it. In my case, I can do that because I am not employed by Games Workshop. This is a great help. In his case, I guess nobody at FFG cares about what he says, because if he had not put a bolded, m'as-tu-vu disclaimer in his signature, nobody would even know he works for them. And even then, people may put as much faith in his disclaimer as they ought to put in mine.
Maybe it's regional. Almost every job I've had has had some kind of interest in restricting employee's private lives. I know at one point simply identifying myself as an employee of my employer was a firing offence. Posting embarrassing facebook photos, too.
A small subsection of Tumblr. You keep on making these statements as if everyone on Tumbr is conspiring against the Cis scum and hates everything that white people stand for, and it's a tiny minority. You're sitting, looking at the Westboro Baptist Church and deciding that christianity is a lost cause and that any discussion about it shouldn't happen.
PhantomViper wrote:Maybe those people think that even discussing those opinions is equal to giving them a degree of legitimacy that they do not deserve? And that mocking those opinions is the only real way to demonstrate their sheer absurdity in the current world?
Fine, that's their prerogative. It's just that when it happens for every single on of the last who-knows-how-many threads, it gets a bit boring. Besides which, there are rules about being polite and not derailing threads on this forum; if they don't think it's a valid topic of discussion, then they can just not post, I guess? They don't get to decide what other people are allowed to discuss.
Sining wrote:Goliath, those are their opinions. While yours are just to come in and complain about the people who don't feel cultural appropriation is a thing. I mean apparently I wouldn't wear jeans cause Asians certainly didn't invent them. We just mass produce them now
That would be a valid point, if I was only talking about this thread. I'm talking about every single time this sort of topic comes up, the same few people come in with the exact same "Hurr hurr 'Check Your Privelege'" and "There's no discussion to be had here, SJWs just shut down the conversation" posts. I'm fine with them having their opinions that it doesn't exist, what annoys me is them then deciding that since they think it doesn't exist, there should therefore never be discussion of it, so they can just derail any thread that discusses it.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
Prove it. I'm serious. Show how brading one's hair (or eating the food of another culture, or learning another language, or dressing in clothing from another culture) enriches "us" at the expense of the "other"?
Okay, how about the appropriation of Native American culture for the purposes of American media? Hollywood made millions off of popularisation of the image of Native Americans as savages with weird rituals. Hollywood gets rich, Native Americans get a free negative stereotype.
Or the inbalance in the popularisation of traditionally "black" music? Rap and R&B music has always been considered to be african-american music, and yet if you look at the results of the billboard awards last year, the top rap artist was Eminem, the top rap song was by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, and the top R&B song was by Robin Thicke. As HiveFleetPlastic described, the dominant culture (in this case the music industry) takes a thing that traditionally belongs to another culture, packages it up for the dominant culture to enjoy, and the other culture loses out.
Am I saying that this is going to cause a global apocalypse? No. But this sort of thing is still somewhat of an issue.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
Prove it. I'm serious. Show how brading one's hair (or eating the food of another culture, or learning another language, or dressing in clothing from another culture) enriches "us" at the expense of the "other"?
Okay, how about the appropriation of Native American culture for the purposes of American media?
Hollywood made millions off of popularisation of the image of Native Americans as savages with weird rituals. Hollywood gets rich, Native Americans get a free negative stereotype.
Or the inbalance in the popularisation of traditionally "black" music? Rap and R&B music has always been considered to be african-american music, and yet if you look at the results of the billboard awards last year, the top rap artist was Eminem, the top rap song was by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, and the top R&B song was by Robin Thicke. As HiveFleetPlastic described, the dominant culture (in this case the music industry) takes a thing that traditionally belongs to another culture, packages it up for the dominant culture to enjoy, and the other culture loses out.
Am I saying that this is going to cause a global apocalypse? No. But this sort of thing is still somewhat of an issue.
And a 12 year old girl braiding her hair still does none of this.
And seriously, saying Eminem is stealing from "black culture" is as big a joke as you could make.
And seriously, saying Eminem is stealing from "black culture" is as big a joke as you could make.
Agreed... I don't listen to cRap, but even I can tell you, just because Eminem or some other white folks won some "rap awards" isn't really indicative of the state of that genre of music.... It just so happens that people who rate that kind of "music" felt that the white kid from one of the worst parts of Detroit happened to have put out the best music that year. And it should really stand out because of just the sheer number of "artists" within that genre that get air time today.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Maybe it's regional. Almost every job I've had has had some kind of interest in restricting employee's private lives. I know at one point simply identifying myself as an employee of my employer was a firing offence. Posting embarrassing facebook photos, too.
Maybe someone should email FFG and see what happens!
Any more arguin about tumblr and about cis, what it means, what it is doing to society, or anything else OT like that, will see the thread locked and a warning issued for spam or OT posting, depending on what is more appropriate for the situation. Similarly, don't make comments that anyone could take as a threat, try and be mature and consider your posts before posting.
Otherwise this seems to have gotten back on topic enough (re: the appropriation of culture) that I'm happy to leave it open for now, just don't take it back to those dark days of the top of this page. No OT posts, try to avoid things that could be seen as threats, and behave or no racism thread for you!
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: Not only does it hurt people's understanding of the culture in question, but it enriches us at their expense.
Prove it. I'm serious. Show how brading one's hair (or eating the food of another culture, or learning another language, or dressing in clothing from another culture) enriches "us" at the expense of the "other"?
Okay, how about the appropriation of Native American culture for the purposes of American media?
Hollywood made millions off of popularisation of the image of Native Americans as savages with weird rituals. Hollywood gets rich, Native Americans get a free negative stereotype.
Are you native American? Or are you being offended for someone else? My own ethnicity has been subject to stereotypes in Hollywood media and I don't complain about it. Heck, back in the 80s, for most HK films, if an angmoh or westerner appeared on screen, they were usually evil and incompetent. Stereotypes exist. You should know considering you pretty much stereotyped me into playing mostly Asian games cause of my ethnicity, or did you conveniently forget that
Goliath wrote: Or the inbalance in the popularisation of traditionally "black" music? Rap and R&B music has always been considered to be african-american music, and yet if you look at the results of the billboard awards last year, the top rap artist was Eminem, the top rap song was by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, and the top R&B song was by Robin Thicke. As HiveFleetPlastic described, the dominant culture (in this case the music industry) takes a thing that traditionally belongs to another culture, packages it up for the dominant culture to enjoy, and the other culture loses out.
Am I saying that this is going to cause a global apocalypse? No. But this sort of thing is still somewhat of an issue.
And a 12 year old girl braiding her hair still does none of this.
I know. It's almost like situation presented in the OP is ridiculous, so I've tried to move past it and have an actual discussion. The situation in the OP is ridiculous, and the people harassing her should be ashamed. That doesn't mean that cultural appropriation isn't a thing though.
And seriously, saying Eminem is stealing from "black culture" is as big a joke as you could make.
For one, I specifically used 'taking' not 'stealing', as there is a difference. Either way, those four guys aren't the be all and end all of it. There's a fair bit of upset in the rap community at the moment about the fact that Iggy Azalea and Macklemore are two of the most popular rappers at the moment in the context of general popular music, when black artists don't get that sort of popularity.
Sining wrote:
Goliath wrote: Okay, how about the appropriation of Native American culture for the purposes of American media?
Hollywood made millions off of popularisation of the image of Native Americans as savages with weird rituals. Hollywood gets rich, Native Americans get a free negative stereotype.
Are you native American? Or are you being offended for someone else? My own ethnicity has been subject to stereotypes in Hollywood media and I don't complain about it. Heck, back in the 80s, for most HK films, if an angmoh or westerner appeared on screen, they were usually evil and incompetent. Stereotypes exist. You should know considering you pretty much stereotyped me into playing mostly Asian games cause of my ethnicity, or did you conveniently forget that
At what point did I say I was offended? Why do you always seem to jump to 'offended'? It couldn't be an attempt to frame people's perceived issues as irrational in an attempt to discredit them, could it? Either way, as I seem to have to explain to you over and over again, just because you have no issue with it doesn't mean that no one has an issue with it. Your experiences are not universal, and you do not speak for the experiences of everyone.
Generally in these threads my argument isn't that 'I'm offended' it's that there are other people who take issue with the thing at hand. I personally don't have an issue, but then again I have the privilege (hisssss) of my culture being pretty much everywhere in some form or another. In this particular instance he asked for examples of when cultural appropriation could be bad, so I gave a couple.
You know, seeing as you made some smart-assed comment in that thread about how you were obviously winning the discussion or something by calling me racist, and then disappeared from that thread, I'm just gonna copy/paste my response here, so that you have some hope of actually reading it.
Sining wrote: Not so comfortable when the shoe's on the other foot now is it?
Which shoe is on what foot now? That phrase is a response to an accusation. I have made no accusations, unless you're saying that actually I'm the one that's exposed to media with my race in the majority, in which case, yeah. I know.
You're making a lot of very very specific assumptions here, most of which are directly related to my race and country. It would be the equivalent of me saying 'oh, you're from UK? You must eat a lot of fish and chips'.
Other than the assumption that you don't live in Sweden, I have made no assumptions related to your race and country that I wouldn't make about every other country, and every other person on the planet. It would be the equivalent of saying 'oh, you're from the UK? You must see a lot of white people on locally made TV and video games'
And secondly, your assumptions are totally wrong in the first place. You're kind of assuming that over here, we're more comfortable playing characters that are like us, which is basically implying we're racist and we like playing our own race.
No, it's implying that you're like almost every other person on the planet and you identify more strongly with people that you share similarities with. It's the reason that almost every game lead is a middle aged white guy, because of the (outdated) notion that the majority of gamers are middle aged white guys, so they're more likely to enjoy the game. Why the feth do you think there's so many calls for better representation of minorities in games? It's not because there's a quota, it's because people want to be able to play as characters that they have some small level of similarity with, and not everyone is middle aged, or white, or a guy.
I would also add that race isn't the only way in which games could be made with you as a target; gender is another, sexuality, build, intelligence, hobbies... I explicitly stated in my original post that race wasn't the only factor, by mentioning non-males as well as non-white-males.
If that was true, I guess I should only be playing the monk and wizard in Diablo III cause they're asian in appearance -_-.
I get that you've already decided to add a subtext to my original post that wasn't there, and decide that everything I do is racist because of it, but seriously. it is not a statement on who should be playing as who, but on who will identify with who. Just because you play a load of games with a range of characters doesn't mean that other people are comfortable doing so.
Adding to that, how are we still having a discussion on whether Asian people in Hong Kong will have a different portrayal in the media compared to Asian people in Sweden?
to clarify: saying that someone in Asia will have more Asian-made media (and thus media containing or portraying Asian people) to consume isn't stereotyping, it's just basic common sense.
Speaking in my official capacity as the King of Debating, it seems pretty obvious to me that Goliath has been sonning almost everyone in this thread.
That said:
Goliath wrote: Okay, how about the appropriation of Native American culture for the purposes of American media?
Hollywood made millions off of popularisation of the image of Native Americans as savages with weird rituals. Hollywood gets rich, Native Americans get a free negative stereotype.
Or the inbalance in the popularisation of traditionally "black" music? Rap and R&B music has always been considered to be african-american music, and yet if you look at the results of the billboard awards last year, the top rap artist was Eminem, the top rap song was by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, and the top R&B song was by Robin Thicke. As HiveFleetPlastic described, the dominant culture (in this case the music industry) takes a thing that traditionally belongs to another culture, packages it up for the dominant culture to enjoy, and the other culture loses out.
Am I saying that this is going to cause a global apocalypse? No. But this sort of thing is still somewhat of an issue.
You started off really well with this post with your Native American example (and I find it likely that your detractors have no valid response toward it), but you fell short with the Rap comparison, at least as far as Eminem is concerned. While you could argue that his whiteness made him easier to market to the casual crowd, Eminem was extremely controversial in his heyday, arguably more-so than the majority of black rappers. The reason he's so popular is because he really is that good.
I may get around to dissecting the sillier posts in this thread later.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sining wrote: It kind of is considering I don't watch Asian media. Do you even have any Asian friends in Asia?
Also if you're not offended, why are you complaining so much
But it sure is easier to find it in an Asian country.
Are you native American? Or are you being offended for someone else? My own ethnicity has been subject to stereotypes in Hollywood media and I don't complain about it. Heck, back in the 80s, for most HK films, if an angmoh or westerner appeared on screen, they were usually evil and incompetent. Stereotypes exist. You should know considering you pretty much stereotyped me into playing mostly Asian games cause of my ethnicity, or did you conveniently forget that
Why do you feel that your own subjective experience is the only one that matters? Are you so selfish?
As always, it's a matter of degree. In the middle you have normal interaction with other cultures. I go to an Italian restaurant. You visit India. Ouze learns Swahili. Yodhrin learns origami. And so on.
Then you have the two extremes, where people take things from one persons culture, make it their own, and in a way stamp out the culture it came from. This is a very colonialistic (if that's a word) thing. Then you have the opposite extreme, the people who believe that doing anything from any other culture beyond your own is "cultural appropriation", so me going to that Italian restaurant, your visit to India, Ouze's desire to talk Swahili and Yodran's eagerness to fold paper into pretty objects is seen as bad, as wiping away the cultures they're from and, or course, the old standby, racism.
So if you agree that cultural appropriation can indeed be harmful, but that something like this girl braiding her hair isn't, what is your issue in this thread?
Sining wrote: It kind of is considering I don't watch Asian media. Do you even have any Asian friends in Asia?
What part of 'your experiences aren't universal' don't you understand? Because you keep on responding to statements about general trends by going 'well, I don't do that, so it must be untrue'.
Also if you're not offended, why are you complaining so much
boredom, procrastination from revising, a general dislike of flawed arguments, thinking that maybe middle aged white guys shouldn't be the ones that get to decide what minorities are offended by, a mental challenge, emotional masochism, physical masochism for when I inevitably smack my head against a wall, a genuine hope to maybe somehow clear up people's misconceptions about these sorts of topics, as half of the complaints I see on these threads seem to be made form faulty premises? Pick whichever one you want.
Related note, how come when it's a subject that you agree with it's a valid criticism, but when you disagree it becomes 'being offended' and 'complaining'? My posts in here haven't been intended as complaints, they've been (as I've said a couple of times now) attempts at having an actual discussion. Just because people make comments to the effect of 'why you so offended bro?' Doesn't suddenly mean that I'm actually getting offended.
So your stereotypes about Asians is OK but others aren't? That's what it reads like to me Goliath. I'm not saying I'm the entirety of Asia but most of the people I know or hang out with don't watch much asian media. Instead we download American shows and Sherlock.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also the irony of telling me that white people don't get to decide what minorities should be offended by is quite hilarious.
Sining wrote: So your stereotypes about Asians is OK but others aren't? That's what it reads like to me Goliath. I'm not saying I'm the entirety of Asia but most of the people I know or hang out with don't watch much asian media. Instead we download American shows and Sherlock.
You know I've said that it's not limited to Asian people? It's not limited to Asian people. I'm not sure how it can be a stereotype if it applies to every single culture at the same time. The majority of media that's easily available in any area will be the stuff that's made in that area. In the UK it's easier to get UK made media, in the US it's easier to get US made media, same for Mexico, Brazil, China, India, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, pretty much everywhere other than the arctic.
Also the irony of telling me that white people don't get to decide what minorities should be offended by is quite hilarious.
Why? I'm not telling minorities what they should and should not be offended by, I'm telling people here to stop making that decision for them.
If you aren't upset by this then fine, that's your prerogative, but that doesn't change the fact that there are other people that *are* annoyed by it. I'm trying to point out you that those people exist.
It's a pretty spurious argument to say that were meant to be living in multicultural countries but some minorities get to pick up their ball and leave if somebody does it "better". "Better" in the sense that they get some pointless awards or get more money? Is that how you judge how valuable your culture is? Are they just wanting the profits from shilling their own culture?
It's like saying Michael Bay is the pinnacle of cinema because he makes a lot of money, some people will see it that way but others will not. People will water down and plastic up anything they can turn a profit on.
If anybody is to blame it's marketing executives and those in the media. Not some little girl braiding her hair or some kids that listen to Iggy Azaelia instead of Azaelia Banks.
This argument is about consumerism, but please feel free to turn it into another race/class war.
Sining wrote: People will be offended by anything. This doesn't mean it's a valid thing to be offended about.
Also your argument isn't that it's easier. It's that Asians consume majority Asian media, especially with regards to games.
Is it? Oh, thank you for telling me what the argument I'm making is, I was unaware that it was the argument that you wanted to argue against, and not the one that I was actually making.
To recap:
Goliath wrote: I'm sure plenty of non-white males play games, but I'm fairly sure that you're probably the dominant race in your country and so many games will be made with you as the target, which won't be the case for non-white males or non-males in Sweden.
The important part of this sentence has been underlined. It doesn't mean that you play them or that you're forced to buy them. It literally just means that more is made, and so more is easily available.
I would add that you're really selling this whole "asia" thing. At the point that I made the original comment, all I knew was that you were, in your own words, a "non-whitem[a]n". I didn't know you were asian until later on in the thread.
Your argument is only as good as you make it. If you can't convey your intentions well enough, there's no need to blame others
Also check the flag at the side of the profile. And then check what games came out from Singapore
Automatically Appended Next Post: And considering you're the one who wants to bring up me being the majority in my country and then you don't want me to mention it in response
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also I'm sorry if my being Asian offends you. Maybe you'd prefer it if I was white? I'd fit in your stereotypes more easily then
Sining wrote: Your argument is only as good as you make it. If you can't convey your intentions well enough, there's no need to blame others
Also check the flag at the side of the profile. And then check what games came out from Singapore
You misconstrued the very first post I made in that thread, and I then spent the next four pages explaining how you had misunderstood it. At that point it's not me not conveying it well enough, it's just you being purposely obtuse.
And considering you're the one who wants to bring up me being the majority in my country and then you don't want me to mention it in response
I didn't say that I don't want you to mention it in response. I said that the fact that you keep on saying it as if I have some hate-on for Asian people, when I didn't even know you were Asian when you made the comment is getting a bit boring.
Also I'm sorry if my being Asian offends you. Maybe you'd prefer it if I was white? I'd fit in your stereotypes more easily then
Oh cool, so now we've gotten to the "LOL UR RACIST" stage of proceedings.
At what point have I said that you being Asian offends me? At what point have I implied, inferred on construed anything that would hint at that?
easysauce wrote: As if ideas and cultures were cookies that were finite and consumable instead of ideas, or culture, which is arguably *meant* to be spread and shared.
There's a difference between being spread and shared, and being taken and overridden though. The example I gave wasn't native american people spreading their culture, it was hollywood deciding that it looked cool, exporting a bastardised version of it, and ending up with the hollywood version of Native culture being the one that most people know, with them being portrayed as savages. Besides which, in the examples you gave, just because it's happened many times doesn't mean that it's a good thing.
On any note, I have an exam in a day an a half, and I'm behind on my revision, so at this point I'm going to bow out of the thread. There's obviously nothing that can be said that will convince you guys, and I'm not particularly a fan of being called a racist over and over again, so I'm out.
On the topic of rap, Eminem has talent and isn't an asshat, while Kanye West has crappy music and is the biggest piece of gak in the music biz (his insults of Taylor Swift at the awards prove all I need). If they flip flopped skin colors and Eminem became black and Kanye became white, I'd still call Eminem decent and Kanye a piece of gak. Skin color shouldn't ever matter. The character of the person in question should be the only thing that matters. This isn't 1960, people. Can't everyone just fething play nice?
You're continually implying that the mainstream media is healthy and that minorities are somehow the only ones being misrepresented or generalised by them.
It's not about White people. It's about mainstream media and mass marketing.
Having a go at the wrong people. It's class war with a little bit of racial garnish.
Sining wrote: So what you're saying is you need a safe space on a public internet forum where people aren't allowed to disagree or mock you.
You might want to try actually reading people's posts before you say stuff like this. Just because we're in a public internet forum doesn't mean we have to act like monkeys flinging our own crap at each other when we disagree.
Sining wrote: So what you're saying is you need a safe space on a public internet forum where people aren't allowed to disagree or mock you.
Because, as always, it must come down to 'we're all so offended' and not 'we're trying to have a civilised discussion and you* keep on contributing with the intellectual equivalent of running into a room, farting and running away'.
I'm more than open to hearing other people's opinions, it's why I come into these threads time and time again. The issue is when there's an attempt at hearing one another's opinions, and 'certain posters' 'contribute' by making posts that consist entirely of asinine buzzwords, making comments about people being needlessly offended when they object to something, or generally try to shut the discussion down, not because they disagree with people's argument, but because in their opinion there shouldn't be a discussion at all.
That's why these threads always end badly.
*you is in the plural here, it is not aimed specifically at Sining.
Maybe those people think that even discussing those opinions is equal to giving them a degree of legitimacy that they do not deserve? And that mocking those opinions is the only real way to demonstrate their sheer absurdity in the current world?
Then such people would be extremely foolish. If you're unwilling to engage with your opposition, not only will you fail to persuade those who hold the most radical variations of the opinion you disagree with, but you will find yourself ill-equipped to persuade moderates or people who hold their opinion out of ignorance of certain facts. Of course, just mocking people is a lot less efforty, and has the added benefit that you'll never run the risk you might find yourself somewhat persuaded by an opponent and have to go through the uncomfortable process of changing your mind.
This argument is about consumerism, but please feel free to turn it into another race/class war.
It's impossible to discuss consumerism thoroughly without also discussing class; consumerism depends on conspicuous consumption to sustain itself, and conspicuous consumption requires ever greater income and capital disparity in order to function.
This argument is about consumerism, but please feel free to turn it into another race/class war.
It's impossible to discuss consumerism thoroughly without also discussing class; consumerism depends on conspicuous consumption to sustain itself, and conspicuous consumption requires ever greater income and capital disparity in order to function.
I'd agree that it serves to eventually create a new massive underclass. I'm meaning more currently bickering about stupid gak like cultural appropriation is a distraction from the real topic at hand and making people fight over a very small amount of money/influence/power while the real wealth and power stays at the very top. Nobody is going to be able to stand up to international finance fething up the world if they manage to fracture the 99.9% so successfully that nobody agrees on anything and we all bicker over the branded goods rather than attacking the people that are branding them.
Sometimes that gets shout down as "eat the Rich", "You're jealous" etc type argument but that's not the case. I don't hate the rich, I'm just wary that they are getting ever wealthier and exerting more influence with no regard for nations or there people. I think most people would need to be fairly warped to see that as I bad thing. (Last bit not directed at yourself, just more generally).
This argument is about consumerism, but please feel free to turn it into another race/class war.
It's impossible to discuss consumerism thoroughly without also discussing class; consumerism depends on conspicuous consumption to sustain itself, and conspicuous consumption requires ever greater income and capital disparity in order to function.
I'd agree that it serves to eventually create a new massive underclass. I'm meaning more currently bickering about stupid gak like cultural appropriation is a distraction from the real topic at hand and making people fight over a very small amount of money/influence/power while the real wealth and power stays at the very top. Nobody is going to be able to stand up to international finance fething up the world if they manage to fracture the 99.9% so successfully that nobody agrees on anything and we all bicker over the branded goods rather than attacking the people that are branding them.
Sometimes that gets shout down as "eat the Rich", "You're jealous" etc type argument but that's not the case. I don't hate the rich, I'm just wary that they are getting ever wealthier and exerting more influence with no regard for nations or there people. I think most people would need to be fairly warped to see that as I bad thing. (Last bit not directed at yourself, just more generally).
Ah, just my misunderstanding then, I agree almost entirely.
timetowaste85 wrote: On the topic of rap, Eminem has talent and isn't an asshat, while Kanye West has crappy music and is the biggest piece of gak in the music biz (his insults of Taylor Swift at the awards prove all I need). If they flip flopped skin colors and Eminem became black and Kanye became white, I'd still call Eminem decent and Kanye a piece of gak. Skin color shouldn't ever matter. The character of the person in question should be the only thing that matters. This isn't 1960, people. Can't everyone just fething play nice?
Kanye is a jerk but it would be dishonest to say Kanye is a crappy rapper (The College Dropout and The Late Registration are great albums).
Or the culture of the Greeks to make the movie 300, which is wildly inaccurate (not to mention dissing the Persians)
As you might recall, the film did in fact get a lot of criticism for its portrayal of the Persians as vicious animals (literally), but the difference is that the inaccuracies are intentional through the use of its Unreliable Narrator.
or James bond movies for appropriating British culture, then Americanizing it, then appropriating American culture?
I'm sure the British are very upset about a British man being portrayed as the ideal male and a huge badass who bags multiple women over the course of each movie and as of late at least has been portrayed as an actual well-rounded character with development. It's entirely equivalent to white people perpetuating negative Native American stereotypes for profit.
Only it isn't. False equivalency.
or for the movie Canadian bacon, for appropriating and making fun of Canadian culture?
No clue, though apparently it got a lot of gak for what you claim it did.
for skyrim and the Scandinavians,
There are no Scandinavians in Skyrim.
so on, and so forth.
Did you have more false equivalencies to share?
Pretty much every single story archetype from any culture in history has, or can have, a story/film/ect made about it.
Pretty much every single film/book/ect draws from something, somewhere, and exaggerates stuff to one extreme or the other.
Yep, and there's a right way to do it. Or do you think that Hollywood releasing a modern version of Mammy would be perfectly okay? Because that's the kind of behavior you're condoning.
Your Idea of cultural appropriation equates to running around screaming
"ITS MINE ITS MINE I WONT SHARE IDEAS AND CULTURE!"
Strawman fallacy (those are popular in this thread).
As if ideas and cultures were cookies that were finite and consumable instead of ideas, or culture, which is arguably *meant* to be spread and shared.
Hey man I'd agree. But there's a difference between actually celebrating and spreading a culture, and releasing a superficial and harmful stereotype-perpetuating theme park version of it for profit, without any feth given toward the culture in question. You know, like what was done with the Native Americans.
Also, if its cultural appropriation for white people to braid their hair, isn't it cultural appropriation for black people to dye their hair blond?
Oh wait, never mind. Black people can never be racist.
You may not have read the thread and as such might not be aware of this, but I'm pretty sure that literally no one condoned the actions of the people in the OP (one person did say we should be sympathetic toward them though, which I disagree with).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote: It's a pretty spurious argument to say that were meant to be living in multicultural countries but some minorities get to pick up their ball and leave if somebody does it "better". "Better" in the sense that they get some pointless awards or get more money? Is that how you judge how valuable your culture is? Are they just wanting the profits from shilling their own culture?
I'd agree. That's why the Eminem comparison is pretty bad. He shouldn't be held back just because his mainstream black contemporaries are so much worse than he is.
I'd agree that it serves to eventually create a new massive underclass. I'm meaning more currently bickering about stupid gak like cultural appropriation is a distraction from the real topic at hand and making people fight over a very small amount of money/influence/power while the real wealth and power stays at the very top. Nobody is going to be able to stand up to international finance fething up the world if they manage to fracture the 99.9% so successfully that nobody agrees on anything and we all bicker over the branded goods rather than attacking the people that are branding them.
Sometimes that gets shout down as "eat the Rich", "You're jealous" etc type argument but that's not the case. I don't hate the rich, I'm just wary that they are getting ever wealthier and exerting more influence with no regard for nations or there people. I think most people would need to be fairly warped to see that as I bad thing. (Last bit not directed at yourself, just more generally).
I agree, but that's not really what this thread is about, is it?
People can want to kill the rich in their sleep (this is hyperbole), while still wanting other people to be sensitive to cultural appropriation (not that I really am all that much).
I'd agree that it serves to eventually create a new massive underclass. I'm meaning more currently bickering about stupid gak like cultural appropriation is a distraction from the real topic at hand and making people fight over a very small amount of money/influence/power while the real wealth and power stays at the very top. Nobody is going to be able to stand up to international finance fething up the world if they manage to fracture the 99.9% so successfully that nobody agrees on anything and we all bicker over the branded goods rather than attacking the people that are branding them.
Sometimes that gets shout down as "eat the Rich", "You're jealous" etc type argument but that's not the case. I don't hate the rich, I'm just wary that they are getting ever wealthier and exerting more influence with no regard for nations or there people. I think most people would need to be fairly warped to see that as I bad thing. (Last bit not directed at yourself, just more generally).
I agree, but that's not really what this thread is about, is it?
People can want to kill the rich in their sleep (this is hyperbole), while still wanting other people to be sensitive to cultural appropriation (not that I really am all that much).
Think of all the rich people we could be killing instead of talking about this!??!?!
It's true that people can, and often do, hold multiple opinions. I just think things like this obfuscate who's really creating the "problem".
Also, if its cultural appropriation for white people to braid their hair, isn't it cultural appropriation for black people to dye their hair blond?
Oh wait, never mind. Black people can never be racist.
You may not have read the thread and as such might not be aware of this, but I'm pretty sure that literally no one condoned the actions of the people in the OP (one person did say we should be sympathetic toward them though, which I disagree with).
It wasn't directed at anyone in this thread at all (because, as you say, I only read the first page, not the following 7 pages), just a sarcastic reference to the common meme of "X people are always the victims of "Y", never the perpetrators".
easysauce wrote: Or the culture of the Greeks to make the movie 300, which is wildly inaccurate (not to mention dissing the Persians)
Honestly, Disney's Hercule was way worse. Or whatever Titan clash something. Or… every goddamn Hollywood movie trying to involve Greek mythology. I hate you Hollywood .
But let me be clear about something. The movie 300 was more offensive to Persians than the parody of the movie 300 by South Park. Yes. The South Park parody was less offensive. South Park. Less offensive. How fethed up is that?
Sorry this post doesn't actually contribute to the thread, just wanted to share my experience as a white guy who had them.
A couple of years back when my afro got huge, I got it braided. Wasn't told off by anyone once about it or called racist, in fact the black guys working in the salon (black hair care salon, obviously) said it looked good on me. No hostility felt from them at all. Girls loved them too.
The only problem was inside the gym! All the impact from my running and the constant assault from my sweat began to take their toll on them. In a few weeks the rows began to unravel at random spots, just little spikes of hair poking out.
I like her hair btw, she went through a long and painful process if they were done well.
PrehistoricUFO wrote: Sorry this post doesn't actually contribute to the thread, just wanted to share my experience as a white guy who had them.
A couple of years back when my afro got huge, I got it braided. Wasn't told off by anyone once about it or called racist, in fact the black guys working in the salon (black hair care salon, obviously) said it looked good on me. No hostility felt from them at all. Girls loved them too.
The only problem was inside the gym! All the impact from my running and the constant assault from my sweat began to take their toll on them. In a few weeks the rows began to unravel at random spots, just little spikes of hair poking out.
I like her hair btw, she went through a long and painful process if they were done well.
That is because there is nothing wrong with it.
The problem is we have a sub-culture of people who seem to live for the sole purpose of being offended. They'll coast through life, simply looking for things to get angry about.
PrehistoricUFO wrote: Sorry this post doesn't actually contribute to the thread, just wanted to share my experience as a white guy who had them.
A couple of years back when my afro got huge, I got it braided. Wasn't told off by anyone once about it or called racist, in fact the black guys working in the salon (black hair care salon, obviously) said it looked good on me. No hostility felt from them at all. Girls loved them too.
The only problem was inside the gym! All the impact from my running and the constant assault from my sweat began to take their toll on them. In a few weeks the rows began to unravel at random spots, just little spikes of hair poking out.
I like her hair btw, she went through a long and painful process if they were done well.
That is because there is nothing wrong with it.
The problem is we have a sub-culture of people who seem to live for the sole purpose of being offended. They'll coast through life, simply looking for things to get angry about.
Truth. And those people need to be sterilized and cast into the sun for being horrible human beings.
easysauce wrote: Or the culture of the Greeks to make the movie 300, which is wildly inaccurate (not to mention dissing the Persians)
Honestly, Disney's Hercule was way worse. Or whatever Titan clash something. Or… every goddamn Hollywood movie trying to involve Greek mythology. I hate you Hollywood .
But let me be clear about something. The movie 300 was more offensive to Persians than the parody of the movie 300 by South Park. Yes. The South Park parody was less offensive. South Park. Less offensive. How fethed up is that?
oh definitely, no argument there that the portrayals are often completely inaccurate historically.
But its all works of *fiction* and anyone who takes works of fiction seriously or expects historical accuracy has a serious problem. More over, someones fictional story is a work of *their* culture, not the cultures they might portray in their fictional medium.
And its not stealing anyone's culture, culture isnt even a thing to be stolen, and its actually supposed to be shared.
The people complaining about cultural appropriation are just as racist in their "its mine, and mine alone" possessive ownership attitude, as people who complain about other ethnicities having babies together.
"those are MY braids, you cant do them!" "those are my women you cant have sex with them!" "those are MY songs, you cannot sing them!" "those are my words you cannot say them" "those are my thoughts, you cannot think them!"
I discussed this article with some friends recently, at a party where it was about 20 black people, a few asians and two white guys. Everyone said the people bugging this poor girl were the actual racists, and very immature people at that.
I was told to never grow a afro though, but for purely "you already look stupid enough" reasons as opposed to weekend social justice warrior "reasons"
300 was based on a highly stylised comic book. Anybody who expects historical accuracy from a comic book movie should be kicked down the nearest well.
Also, whilst we're on the subject of offensive media, I wonder what Iranian children's tv is like. I expect it's rather a lot like Palestinian children's tv. Iranians are no strangers to offensive racial stereotypes I expect.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: 300 was based on a highly stylised comic book. Anybody who expects historical accuracy from a comic book movie should be kicked down the nearest well.
Also, whilst we're on the subject of offensive media, I wonder what Iranian children's tv is like. I expect it's rather a lot like Palestinian children's tv. Iranians are no strangers to offensive racial stereotypes I expect.
Anyone expecting Iranian or Palestinian children's TV to be accurate should be kicked down the nearest well.
Grey Templar wrote: Getting offended over an inaccurate portrayal of a culture that existed almost 2500 years ago would be a bit petty. It doesn't exist anymore.
In fact, I think getting offended over anything that happened more than 2 generations ago is a bit petty. The past is the past, move on.
That works for us Americans, cause we didn't have a culture 2500 years ago (as in a American-European culture). We're not even 300 years old yet.
But some countries have histories that go back thousands of years, so I think it's not that outlandish said countries would get offended about wildly inaccurate and negative presentations of their ancient ancestors.
That said. 300 was fething fun and Iran can get over it
I have been reading this thread for a while now, and I just need to get this of my chest:
Cultures are not bound by rules, laws or anything. A culture can not 'have' or own any element. Cultures are not static, they change constantly. An element can appear in culture A, but once this element is picked up by culture B, it ceases to be an exclusive part of culture A. The element is just as much part of culture B as it is of A.
Take the tie, for example. The tie originated in Croatia. One day someone must have invented it, liked it, others liked it too and started to wear it, and so the tie became a part of Croatian culture. Then the tie was seen by the French, they liked it, started to wear it too and so the tie became a part of French culture. Then other Europeans saw what the French were doing, they liked it, started wearing it at as well and so the tie became a part of European culture. Other cultures saw what the Europeans were doing, liked it and also started to wear ties. So the tie became a part of general human culture. And this has happened with many, many things. Almost everything you use was once exclusive to the culture that invented it, but then spread to other cultures and thus stopped being exclusive, becoming a part of 'general' culture.
This has also happened with "black" music like jazz and rap. Jazz and rap were invented in the Afro-American culture, others heard it, liked it and also started using it. At that moment, jazz and rap ceased being exclusive to Afro-American culture. Jazz and rap are not "black" music, they are a part of the general human world culture. This is the way of cultures.
The idea that any one culture somehow can have more right to a certain element than other cultures is fething ******.
I doubt the average Iranian knows much about the history of Persia.
You'd be right in some cases, but Iran is pretty history conscious (at least for anything that happened before the 19th century. Starting around there the propaganda starts overriding the reality). The Babylonian Empire in particular. It's basically they're Roman Empire and they get pretty vocal about how awesome it was
Grey Templar wrote: Getting offended over an inaccurate portrayal of a culture that existed almost 2500 years ago would be a bit petty. It doesn't exist anymore.
In fact, I think getting offended over anything that happened more than 2 generations ago is a bit petty. The past is the past, move on.
That works for us Americans, cause we didn't have a culture 2500 years ago (as in a American-European culture). We're not even 300 years old yet.
But some countries have histories that go back thousands of years, so I think it's not that outlandish said countries would get offended about wildly inaccurate and negative presentations of their ancient ancestors.
That said. 300 was fething fun and Iran can get over it
You Americans did have a culture 2500 years ago, present day American culture is just a development of that culture. Cultures never start or cease to exist, they just change, by incorporating new elements and discarding old ones.
Grey Templar wrote: How many of the people who live in that supposedly 2500 year old culture even know much of anything about it?
I doubt the average Iranian knows much about the history of Persia.
One would assume Iranian children learn the history of their country in schools. The Acheamenid Empire is probably an important part of their lessons, seeing as it is an important part of Iranian history.
I'm not talking about that though. Americans view ourselves as distinct from Europe or the Native Americans. Yeah our ancestors go back thousands of years, but culturally we only recognize ourselves in a very modern sense. Our conceptual existence doesn't go back very far.
easysauce wrote: oh definitely, no argument there that the portrayals are often completely inaccurate historically.
But its all works of *fiction* and anyone who takes works of fiction seriously or expects historical accuracy has a serious problem. More over, someones fictional story is a work of *their* culture, not the cultures they might portray in their fictional medium.
It is not just a question of being historically inaccurate. It would not be a problem if the actual history/culture were well-known. The problem is when they are not, and the only contact many people had with them was that awfully twisted version, that will therefore give false ideas about it.
easysauce wrote: I discussed this article with some friends recently, at a party where it was about 20 black people, a few asians and two white guys. Everyone said the people bugging this poor girl were the actual racists, and very immature people at that.
Are you still on this? Nobody in this thread is arguing otherwise.
Yeah, which was way better as it portrayed the story as two terrible, dystopian forces clashing together. The movie completely ruined everything by turning the Spartans into some kind of “American heroes”. That was the worst move ever.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Also, whilst we're on the subject of offensive media, I wonder what Iranian children's tv is like. I expect it's rather a lot like Palestinian children's tv. Iranians are no strangers to offensive racial stereotypes I expect.
Is that a genuine question, or is it just a rhetorical question based on biased preconceptions? Because if that is an actual question, I can find out for you. If I recall correctly, they did have a bunch of Japanese cartoons when my friend, who is now in her early thirties, was a child. The same we had in France.
Grey Templar wrote: I doubt the average Iranian knows much about the history of Persia.
I doubt you know much about the average Iran. Am I wrong here? Have you meet some of them? You do know they have schools in Iran, right?
US culture shares very little with the Native cultures that were here at the time or before. We have far more in common with British culture, and even that is a stretch.
We're a distinct culture that appeared roughly in the 1600s from an amalgamation of multiple European cultures as well as ideologies.
Which is a joke. The U.S.A. are a bunch of Europeans that crossed an ocean, and then never, ever cut ties, culturally, with the rest of Europe, along with some slaves from Africa whose culture was completely destroyed, and who had to create a new one that was therefore hugely inspired by their European masters. And a very few natives. Those do have a culture that is not European, I give you that.
Which is a joke. The U.S.A. are a bunch of Europeans that crossed an ocean, and then never, ever cut ties, culturally, with the rest of Europe, along with some slaves from Africa whose culture was completely destroyed, and who had to create a new one that was therefore hugely inspired by their European masters. And a very few natives. Those do have a culture that is not European, I give you that.
That's incredibly naive. Come over here and see for yourself. We share very little with Europeans.
But we do plenty of negative stereotyping of Europe ourselves because we see ourselves as separate, so if someone makes a film portraying our European ancestors as horrible, we really wouldn't get in much of an uproar about it in the same way Iran or China might get upset about similar portrayals of their own ancestors.
We spent 200 years culturally doing most of the same things Europeans do, while calling it something else, and lambasting those silly Europeans and their Imperialist ways Ignore the Philippines. Nothing to see there. We weren't Imperialist, we were spreading freedom!
Grey Templar wrote: That's incredibly naive. Come over here and see for yourself. We share very little with Europeans.
Come see over here. Please, do not forget to not stop at visiting just ONE country, though. Because, as incredible as it might sound, we do have cultural differences between European countries. And you might discover that the UK can be closer to the US than to some other European countries in tons of aspects. Europe is diverse. The U.S.A. are basically just one of the many, many aspects of this diversity .
Which is a joke. The U.S.A. are a bunch of Europeans that crossed an ocean, and then never, ever cut ties, culturally, with the rest of Europe, along with some slaves from Africa whose culture was completely destroyed, and who had to create a new one that was therefore hugely inspired by their European masters. And a very few natives. Those do have a culture that is not European, I give you that.
Your understanding of the US and its culture is a bit lacking.
If we were so similar, why do you guys spend so much time slamming on us? *rolls eyes*
LordofHats wrote: I'm not talking about that though. Americans view ourselves as distinct from Europe or the Native Americans. Yeah our ancestors go back thousands of years, but culturally we only recognize ourselves in a very modern sense. Our conceptual existence doesn't go back very far.
That's because if you go back only a little bit you get the near genocide of the native Americans. Kind of hard to go by that, it's meant America needed to create their founding fathers myth to block it from the nations sub conscious. I love America but your right some historical reality wouldn't be a bad idea. Old adage of understanding history to deal with today. The myth hasn't done you any favours.
Grey Templar wrote: That's incredibly naive. Come over here and see for yourself. We share very little with Europeans.
Come see over here. Please, do not forget to not stop at visiting just ONE country, though. Because, as incredible as it might sound, we do have cultural differences between European countries. And you might discover that the UK can be closer to the US than to some other European countries in tons of aspects. Europe is diverse. The U.S.A. are basically just one of the many, many aspects of this diversity .
I never said Europeans were the same. They have many differences between each other.
LordofHats wrote: I'm not talking about that though. Americans view ourselves as distinct from Europe or the Native Americans. Yeah our ancestors go back thousands of years, but culturally we only recognize ourselves in a very modern sense. Our conceptual existence doesn't go back very far.
That's because if you go back only a little bit you get the near genocide of the native Americans. Kind of hard to go by that, it's meant America needed to create their founding fathers myth to block it from the nations sub conscious. I love America but your right some historical reality wouldn't be a bad idea. Old adage of understanding history to deal with today. The myth hasn't done you any favours.
The "near genocide" was caused by disease that was just a natural by-product of contact. Even if the best of intentions were meant, the same thing would have happened.
What occured in the 1800s was hardly genocide. The majority of the damage was caused by the Spanish, French, British, et al.
djones520 wrote: Your understanding of the US and its culture is a bit lacking.
Maybe your understanding of European cultures is lacking.
djones520 wrote: If we were so similar, why do you guys spend so much time slamming on us? *rolls eyes*
Is that a real question? Because it is always like this! Put two people with largely similar views, and they will argue to death over their small differences, sometime way, way more vehemently that if they had completely different worldviews.
djones520 wrote: Your understanding of the US and its culture is a bit lacking.
Maybe your understanding of European cultures is lacking.
Excuse me? Where have I made blanket statements about Europe? I recognize that most of the nations are very culturally distinct. You're the one in here throwing around blanket accusations. Bet you didn't know I was born in Europe did you? Greece to be exact. Did you know I've served side by side with the Spanish Air Force? I'm actually very cognizant of European culture.
Not that it has anything to do with the discussion. All that was said is that we Americans do not see ourselves as culturally identical to Europeans. And that all of a sudden means we don't understand European culture? All while you attack ours, and in your attempt to sum it up, completely white washing entire aspects of our own culture. Yet you sit there and attack people for not "knowing" your culture.
What occured in the 1800s was hardly genocide. The majority of the damage was caused by the Spanish, French, British, et al.
Backwards. By the 1800's, surviving Native Americans had immunities to most diseases save small pox which was sporadic in that period at best. The 'plagues' had run their course throughout the 16th and mid 17th centuries (estimates range from a fatality rate of 50% to 90% of native populations). But this had run it's course by the 1800's. If there's any irony, Europeans suffered a similar fatality rate during the same time period from Malaria alone EDIT: Mosquito Empires is a very very good book on that subject. If you've never engaged in environmental history before, it's a gem
Throughout the 1800's the US did commit a willful genocide of Native Americans. An infrequent, unorganized one, that tended to come and go. But it happened. Pretending it didn't is delusional and ignoring one of the darkest parts of American history.
What occured in the 1800s was hardly genocide. The majority of the damage was caused by the Spanish, French, British, et al.
Backwards. By the 1800's, surviving Native Americans had immunities to most diseases save small pox which was sporadic in that period at best. The 'plagues' had run their course throughout the 16th and mid 17th centuries (estimates range from a fatality rate of 50% to 90% of native populations). But this had run it's course by the 1800's. If there's any irony, Europeans suffered a similar fatality rate during the same time period from Malaria alone
Throughout the 1800's the US did commit a willful genocide of Native Americans. An infrequent, unorganized one, that tended to come and go. But it happened. Pretending it didn't is delusional and ignoring one of the darkest parts of American history.
Pretending that what we did was genocide is just trying to throw a guilt party. The actions of our government and people were reprehensible, undoubtedly. The closest true attempt to "erase" the Native Americans though was when we took a page from Australia (or maybe they took it from us, or maybe other countries tried it in their Imperial days), and took their children in an attempt raise them as white in an attempt to make them forget their own culture. Even that was a limited effort that never gained much traction.
Genocide is a concerted effort to erase a people. We never did that. We fought wars with them, we forcibly relocated them from their land, we even at times created situations that led to starvation, but it was never a policy to just destroy them, erase them from the earth.
djones520 wrote: Pretending that what we did was genocide is just trying to throw a guilt party.
It was a genocide and has nothing to do with a guilt party. Lets try and be a leg up on Turkey on this one, kay
We spent a good part of the later half of that century taking land, and killing anyone who didn't like us taking their land. When we got tired of fighting overland, we just starting coraling all the naysayers into reservations and killing them if they didn't stay on their side of the line. It was a genocide. Genocides don't have to be executed with the expressed purpose of 'erasing' a group to qualify.
The closest true attempt to "erase" the Native Americans though was when we took a page from Australia (or maybe they took it from us, or maybe other countries tried it in their Imperial days),
Pretty common procedure throughout history. Ours was laughably ineffective. Bringing up another Turkey reference, the only greater failure of such a program probably belonged to the Ottoman Empire and their attempt to spread "Ottomaness" (yeah they had no idea what Ottomaness was either).
djones520 wrote: Where have I made blanket statements about Europe?[…] You're the one in here throwing around blanket accusations.
So, what were those statements? That you never cut cultural ties with Europe? Did I miss that long time period when books and ideas stop flowing between the USA and the rest of Europe?
Or the fact most people in the U.S. are descendant of either European immigrants or African slaves? Is that somehow inaccurate?
Maybe just saying “You are wrong” without saying how I was wrong was not the best argument ever.
djones520 wrote: we took a page from Australia (or maybe they took it from us, or maybe other countries tried it in their Imperial days), and took their children in an attempt raise them as white in an attempt to make them forget their own culture.
Which is a joke. The U.S.A. are a bunch of Europeans that crossed an ocean, and then never, ever cut ties, culturally, with the rest of Europe, along with some slaves from Africa whose culture was completely destroyed, and who had to create a new one that was therefore hugely inspired by their European masters. And a very few natives. Those do have a culture that is not European, I give you that.
That's incredibly naive. Come over here and see for yourself. We share very little with Europeans.
Not sure if this is joke or serious.
If it is serious, it is on the same level of nonsense with the "Russia is not part of Europe" thing that Russian nationalists keep saying. There are large differences between the cultures of the US, Russia and Germany for example. But all those three cultures are still distinctively European when you compare them with true non-European cultures such as those of Africa and Asia.
So, what were those statements? That you never cut cultural ties with Europe? Did I miss that long time period when books and ideas stop flowing between the USA and the rest of Europe?
Or the fact most people in the U.S. are descendant of either European immigrants or African slaves? Is that somehow inaccurate?
Maybe just saying “You are wrong” without saying how I was wrong was not the best argument ever.
Japan and the USA have strong cultural influences on each other. Does that mean that we're culturally identical with them? You seem to be trying to start a flame war claiming that the US and Europe are culturally identical, ignoring the fact that significant portions of US culture are based not on anything in Europe, but on virtually everywhere in the world. Heck, Hispanics are projected to outnumber everyone else in California combined in the next decade, so much of the west coast and midwest culture is based more on latin America than Europe. Not to mention that you've made the statement that culturally, there are a lot of different groups within Europe. Germany is not the same as France which is not the same as Italy which is not the same as Greece which is not the same as... If you ever take a roadtrip to America, you'll find exactly the same thing. Culturally, there is a world of difference between the deep south and New York and SoCal and the midwest and so on. And considering that cultural schisms are what lead the colonies to break away from Britain in the first place, I don't know what you're being so argumentative about.
In some parts of America, there are strong European influences. That is not the same as saying that America is basically just a rip-off of Europe.
So, what were those statements? That you never cut cultural ties with Europe? Did I miss that long time period when books and ideas stop flowing between the USA and the rest of Europe?
Or the fact most people in the U.S. are descendant of either European immigrants or African slaves? Is that somehow inaccurate?
Maybe just saying “You are wrong” without saying how I was wrong was not the best argument ever.
Japan and the USA have strong cultural influences on each other. Does that mean that we're culturally identical with them? You seem to be trying to start a flame war claiming that the US and Europe are culturally identical, ignoring the fact that significant portions of US culture are based not on anything in Europe, but on virtually everywhere in the world. Heck, Hispanics are projected to outnumber everyone else in California combined in the next decade, so much of the west coast and midwest culture is based more on latin America than Europe. Not to mention that you've made the statement that culturally, there are a lot of different groups within Europe. Germany is not the same as France which is not the same as Italy which is not the same as Greece which is not the same as... If you ever take a roadtrip to America, you'll find exactly the same thing. Culturally, there is a world of difference between the deep south and New York and SoCal and the midwest and so on. And considering that cultural schisms are what lead the colonies to break away from Britain in the first place, I don't know what you're being so argumentative about.
In some parts of America, there are strong European influences. That is not the same as saying that America is basically just a rip-off of Europe.
Most of Latin American culture also came from Europe, and many Hispanics are of European descent. Just so you know.
Also, American culture can never be a "rip-off" of European culture, because there can be no such thing as a "rip-off" when speaking about cultures. American culture is a natural development.
Iron_Captain wrote: Also, American culture can never be a "rip-off" of European culture, because there can be no such thing as a "rip-off" when speaking about cultures. American culture is a natural development.
Yes, absolutely. It's so ridiculous when people talk about stealing or ripping off culture. You can't steal culture because culture doesn't belong to anyone. You don't own culture, you participate in it, and it is possible to participate in more than one. It's similar to how language doesn't belong to anyone. Both culture and language will continue on, and evolve, with or without you.
Most of Latin American culture also came from Europe, and many Hispanics are of European descent. Just so you know.
A lot of Latin American culture came from Europe, and a lot of it comes from Latin America, but if we're arguing over the exact percentage of which cultures influenced which other cultures then it's kind of missing the point.
Also, American culture can never be a "rip-off" of European culture, because there can be no such thing as a "rip-off" when speaking about cultures. American culture is a natural development.
It's different. The US were founded by Europeans, yes, but then quickly developed a vastly different culture. It's fully understandable as those people had to fight for their freedom and thus disconnect from the UK, let alone found an entire country long after Europe did. Whereas the US quickly develope their "Can do!" attitude, that focused on targetting the individual and his achievements, greatly valueing those, Europe, at the same time, became more and more socialist, leaning towards making the "whole" appear more important than the individual. Differences then became even clearer with the rise of capitalism in the US and an actually free market. Europe has since then be strongly influenced by the US and European culture rather follows US culture than the other way around. TTIP etc. are a very good and important step for a better Europe that is currently negatively influenced by leftists.
DarkLink wrote: Japan and the USA have strong cultural influences on each other. Does that mean that we're culturally identical with them?
Can I point to millions of years during which Japan developed their own culture, far from any US influence? Can I point you to the Japanese language not being from Europe, the Japanese alphabet not being used in Europe, the Japanese food being very different from European food, using different ingredients and all that, the Japanese religion (Shinto) not having been practiced at any sizable scale in Europe ever, the Japanese mythos and festivals, …
Say, for instance, what is the staple food for the U.S.A? Is it pizza, burgers, hot dogs?
Pizza comes from Italy, Hamburger reference Hamburg by its very name, hot dogs are also linked to Germany. Notice how French fries are made out of some ingredient that did not exist in France and was imported from America. That is just how isolated from Europe the U.S.A. were…
What about, say, festivals? Is Halloween not directly linked to European traditions? I bet it is. What about independence day? Oh, that is all about being free from the U.K.! Christmas?
Maybe language? Oh, no, not really. Religion? Darn it!
The thing is, the reason why European cultures are relatively close to each other is that ideas were able to travel from one to the other because of geographical proximity. As soon as the U.S.A. were created, the means to have idea travel from Europeans living in Europe to Europeans living in America were already there, and they have been through all of the U.S.A. history. As a result, the U.S.A. have a culture that is different from all other European cultures (but this is true for every other European culture too!), but still very much a European culture. Meanwhile, Japan has been isolated from European cultures from its creation up to, basically, the 19th century. During this whole time they developed in a direction completely different from what Europeans countries did, because there really was no exchange of ideas due to geographical distance.
DarkLink wrote: You seem to be trying to start a flame war claiming that the US and Europe are culturally identical
Not “culturally identical”. That would imply them being on the same level. Or, in other words, the culture of one country being put on the same level as dozens of different cultures. What I am actually saying is that the U.S. culture, which is different from the French culture and the German culture and the Spanish culture and the Hungarian culture and the Finnish culture and…, is part of the wide family of European cultures. But I get that people from the U.S. have troubles with the idea of their cultures being considered one among many, and they prefer being special snowflakes. That is why you consider it insulting to say that the U.S. is culturally part of Europe. But take a moment to think about it: if some European wanted to insult you, why would he call you a European? Do you really believe European consider it an insult to be called European?
DarkLink wrote: Heck, Hispanics are projected to outnumber everyone else in California combined in the next decade, so much of the west coast and midwest culture is based more on latin America than Europe.
Hint: where do you think the word “latin” comes from? Is that something out of Africa? Or Asia? Is the Latin language something used by South America's native people?
Though I am not sure, but maybe Latin American countries did a better job at incorporating cultural elements from native people and therefore are actually less European than the U.S.
DarkLink wrote: If you ever take a roadtrip to America, you'll find exactly the same thing.
To quite a lesser degree. Last time I checked, you all spoke the same language (with some place being a bit more Spanish-inclined, but how can you even compare that to the many, many European languages?), had the same festivals, eat largely similar meals, have relatively similar religious denominations, …
But yeah, you do have cultural differences.
Let me ask you. Can you point me to some cultural aspect of the U.S.A. that sets them apart from the rest of Europe. Something that all the European cultures have in common, but that is different in the U.S. ?
Keep in mind that even if you do manage to find one, it is still going to be a weak argument, as I can very easily do this for an obviously European country: Greece has a unique alphabet, that is not found in other European countries.
djones520 wrote: Pretending that what we did was genocide is just trying to throw a guilt party.
It was a genocide and has nothing to do with a guilt party. Lets try and be a leg up on Turkey on this one, kay
We spent a good part of the later half of that century taking land, and killing anyone who didn't like us taking their land. When we got tired of fighting overland, we just starting coraling all the naysayers into reservations and killing them if they didn't stay on their side of the line. It was a genocide. Genocides don't have to be executed with the expressed purpose of 'erasing' a group to qualify.
The closest true attempt to "erase" the Native Americans though was when we took a page from Australia (or maybe they took it from us, or maybe other countries tried it in their Imperial days),
Pretty common procedure throughout history. Ours was laughably ineffective. Bringing up another Turkey reference, the only greater failure of such a program probably belonged to the Ottoman Empire and their attempt to spread "Ottomaness" (yeah they had no idea what Ottomaness was either).
Just to throw my 'historian' hat into the mix, yes, America did in fact try to erase Native culture. This was my area of specialty back in college.
We created boarding schools to send Native youth to where they were given "Christian" names, forbidden to speak their language and taught that their cultures were bad. It created whole generations that turned away from their native culture. Only recently have Native Americans began reestablishing their cultural identities in a positive, non stereotyped way.
I can link an article about the whole thing if you like.
I'm the last person to believe in white guilt or cis-male whatever crap. But yeah, The US government did attempt to commit genocide and wipe out the Native culture.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Say, for instance, what is the staple food for the U.S.A? Is it pizza, burgers, hot dogs?
I don't think pizza, burgers, and hot dogs really count as a staple food. It's well-known fast food, but not a staple. That'd be like calling Döner Kebap a staple of German food.
Let me ask you. Can you point me to some cultural aspect of the U.S.A. that sets them apart from the rest of Europe. Something that all the European cultures have in common, but that is different in the U.S. ?
Keep in mind that even if you do manage to find one, it is still going to be a weak argument, as I can very easily do this for an obviously European country: Greece has a unique alphabet, that is not found in other European countries.
Native-American cultures, language, alphabet (in the case of Cherokee) and cultural influence (particularly in the west, but seen in place names nationwide). Jazz. The 2nd Amendment. Cajun culture in Louisiana. I'm sure there are more things I'm forgetting.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Say, for instance, what is the staple food for the U.S.A? Is it pizza, burgers, hot dogs?
I don't think pizza, burgers, and hot dogs really count as a staple food. It's well-known fast food, but not a staple. That'd be like calling Döner Kebap a staple of German food.
Let me ask you. Can you point me to some cultural aspect of the U.S.A. that sets them apart from the rest of Europe. Something that all the European cultures have in common, but that is different in the U.S. ?
Keep in mind that even if you do manage to find one, it is still going to be a weak argument, as I can very easily do this for an obviously European country: Greece has a unique alphabet, that is not found in other European countries.
Native-American cultures, language, alphabet (in the case of Cherokee) and cultural influence (particularly in the west, but seen in place names nationwide). Jazz. The 2nd Amendment. Cajun culture in Louisiana. I'm sure there are more things I'm forgetting.
Don't forget African-American culture, it's very US specific.
Hordini wrote: I don't think pizza, burgers, and hot dogs really count as a staple food.
Tell me what would the U.S. staple food be, then.
But really, do you believe that the U.S. food sets them apart from the rest of Europe, in the same way the Japanese food sets them apart from Europe?
Hordini wrote: Native-American cultures, language, alphabet (in the case of Cherokee) and cultural influence (particularly in the west, but seen in place names nationwide).
Yeah, those certainly are not European. Certainly people in the U.S. that live by Native American culture are not just Europeans abroad. Now, the average U.S. citizen? That is a completely different story.
We do have Jazz in Europe. Because, you know, when it became popular, it crossed the borders, as the U.S. and the rest of Europe have never cut their very close cultural ties.
Let me ask you, for how long exactly was Jazz popular in the U.S. and not in the rest of Europe?
That was a joke, right? You do not actually believe your views on gun control makes you unique, do you? You do realize in Switzerland most citizen are expect to keep an assault rifle at their home to be ready to defend their countries if need be. And that they do have neutrality as a constitutional principle. And that they have direct democracy. They sure are way, way more unique on the political front and the gun-control front than you are. And they are still very much Europeans.
Those guys that speak French, you mean? How un-European of them! Just like the French, the Swiss, the Belgians, …
Really, they totally set the U.S. apart from the rest of Europe: they have minorities that speaks French!
d-usa wrote: Don't forget African-American culture, it's very US specific.
Lots of different claims to the origin of the Hamburger exist, but they all come from the US. Multiple people appear to have come up with the idea simultaneously, and the idea was popularized at the 1904 Worlds Fair(which was held in St Louis) The name supposedly originated from some sailors who were from Hamburg and named the nameless dish after themselves.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Okay, then you win. The U.S. are indeed a special snowflake. Congratulations for being so unique and different!
You mean just like everyone else?
Is it really so hard for you to accept that we have our own culture?
DarkLink wrote: Japan and the USA have strong cultural influences on each other. Does that mean that we're culturally identical with them?
Can I point to millions of years during which Japan developed their own culture, far from any US influence? Can I point you to the Japanese language not being from Europe, the Japanese alphabet not being used in Europe, the Japanese food being very different from European food, using different ingredients and all that, the Japanese religion (Shinto) not having been practiced at any sizable scale in Europe ever, the Japanese mythos and festivals, …
Say, for instance, what is the staple food for the U.S.A? Is it pizza, burgers, hot dogs?
Pizza comes from Italy, Hamburger reference Hamburg by its very name, hot dogs are also linked to Germany. Notice how French fries are made out of some ingredient that did not exist in France and was imported from America. That is just how isolated from Europe the U.S.A. were…
What about, say, festivals? Is Halloween not directly linked to European traditions? I bet it is. What about independence day? Oh, that is all about being free from the U.K.! Christmas?
Maybe language? Oh, no, not really. Religion? Darn it!
The thing is, the reason why European cultures are relatively close to each other is that ideas were able to travel from one to the other because of geographical proximity. As soon as the U.S.A. were created, the means to have idea travel from Europeans living in Europe to Europeans living in America were already there, and they have been through all of the U.S.A. history. As a result, the U.S.A. have a culture that is different from all other European cultures (but this is true for every other European culture too!), but still very much a European culture. Meanwhile, Japan has been isolated from European cultures from its creation up to, basically, the 19th century. During this whole time they developed in a direction completely different from what Europeans countries did, because there really was no exchange of ideas due to geographical distance.
DarkLink wrote: You seem to be trying to start a flame war claiming that the US and Europe are culturally identical
Not “culturally identical”. That would imply them being on the same level. Or, in other words, the culture of one country being put on the same level as dozens of different cultures. What I am actually saying is that the U.S. culture, which is different from the French culture and the German culture and the Spanish culture and the Hungarian culture and the Finnish culture and…, is part of the wide family of European cultures. But I get that people from the U.S. have troubles with the idea of their cultures being considered one among many, and they prefer being special snowflakes. That is why you consider it insulting to say that the U.S. is culturally part of Europe. But take a moment to think about it: if some European wanted to insult you, why would he call you a European? Do you really believe European consider it an insult to be called European?
DarkLink wrote: Heck, Hispanics are projected to outnumber everyone else in California combined in the next decade, so much of the west coast and midwest culture is based more on latin America than Europe.
Hint: where do you think the word “latin” comes from? Is that something out of Africa? Or Asia? Is the Latin language something used by South America's native people?
Though I am not sure, but maybe Latin American countries did a better job at incorporating cultural elements from native people and therefore are actually less European than the U.S.
DarkLink wrote: If you ever take a roadtrip to America, you'll find exactly the same thing.
To quite a lesser degree. Last time I checked, you all spoke the same language (with some place being a bit more Spanish-inclined, but how can you even compare that to the many, many European languages?), had the same festivals, eat largely similar meals, have relatively similar religious denominations, …
But yeah, you do have cultural differences.
Let me ask you. Can you point me to some cultural aspect of the U.S.A. that sets them apart from the rest of Europe. Something that all the European cultures have in common, but that is different in the U.S. ?
Keep in mind that even if you do manage to find one, it is still going to be a weak argument, as I can very easily do this for an obviously European country: Greece has a unique alphabet, that is not found in other European countries.
The thought that you think Latin culture is Spanish is downright funny. Spanish culture is an overlay over a thousand tribes in Central and South America. More people than Europe when it was obliterated.
Talk about your own culture. Don't talk about ones you don't know about.
Indeed. Based on sausages that were invented in Germany.
“The sausages were culturally imported from Germany and popularized in the United States”.
Compare this to, say, sushi. Were sushi made out of something from Europe?
Grey Templar wrote: Is it really so hard for you to accept that we have our own culture?
I am wondering if I am not expressing myself clearly or if you just skimmed over my messages without reading them.
Let me quote myself:
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: What I am actually saying is that the U.S. culture, which is different from the French culture and the German culture and the Spanish culture and the Hungarian culture and the Finnish culture and…, is part of the wide family of European cultures.
Does that seem to you like I am saying that the U.S. does not have their own culture? Because I am pretty sure this is explicitly saying that the U.S. does have a specific culture. Tell me, is that not clear from what I wrote?
The biggest problem is that we have people pretending that there is such a thing as "European culture". There are a lot of different cultures in Europe, and quite a few of them share different similarities, but pretending that Europe is some sort of anarcho-syndicalist commune where people take turns to be a sort of executive officer for the week where all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs and that it has a singular culture is asinine. That's where the whole "the US is a European culture" fails because there is no such thing.
The second problem is that people seem to be confusing "culture" with "something someone does", such as taking the US gun culture and declaring "the Swiss have gun ownership, Switzerland is a country in Europe, therefore gun culture is European culture" when "gun culture" is so much more than "legal gun ownership".
Saying "the US is no different than European culture" is just as stupid as saying "German culture is no different than European culture" and "Italian culture is no different than European culture".
US culture is a culture that has developed from assimilating cultural habits that originated in Europe, in Africa, in South America, and from Asia. Through the years these influences have spread throughout our country and changed, and became a US culture that also incorporates multiple sub-cultures.
Grey Templar wrote: The differences between US culture and any European culture are far greater than the differences between any two European Cultures.
Well, that certainly is your opinion. I disagree. I think that, for instance, the U.K. culture is way closer to the U.S. culture than to the Albanian, or Greek culture. Actually I think this misconception from U.S. people that they are very different from Europeans and that Europeans are similar to each other comes from the fact many of them do not know that much about many European cultures, especially those that are not from western Europe.
But at least, it seems you now have a better understanding of what I was arguing about.
Also yes, you are very similar to Canada, and I would argue that Canada is just as European as the U.S., for similar reasons. Just like France is much closer culturally to Belgium than they are to Greece or Albania, again.
Grey Templar wrote: The differences between US culture and any European culture are far greater than the differences between any two European Cultures.
Well, that certainly is your opinion. I disagree. I think that, for instance, the U.K. culture is way closer to the U.S. culture than to the Albanian, or Greek culture. Actually I think this misconception from U.S. people that they are very different from Europeans and that Europeans are similar to each other comes from the fact many of them do not know that much about many European cultures, especially those that are not from western Europe.
But at least, it seems you now have a better understanding of what I was arguing about.
Also yes, you are very similar to Canada, and I would argue that Canada is just as European as the U.S., for similar reasons. Just like France is much closer culturally to Belgium than they are to Greece or Albania, again.
Well unless you've actually been to the US I can't put much stock in your opinion.
I've actually been to Europe. UK, Germany, and France. France was just 2 days to be fair.
Grey Templar wrote: The differences between US culture and any European culture are far greater than the differences between any two European Cultures.
Well, that certainly is your opinion. I disagree. I think that, for instance, the U.K. culture is way closer to the U.S. culture than to the Albanian, or Greek culture. Actually I think this misconception from U.S. people that they are very different from Europeans and that Europeans are similar to each other comes from the fact many of them do not know that much about many European cultures, especially those that are not from western Europe. But at least, it seems you now have a better understanding of what I was arguing about.
Also yes, you are very similar to Canada, and I would argue that Canada is just as European as the U.S., for similar reasons. Just like France is much closer culturally to Belgium than they are to Greece or Albania, again.
Well unless you've actually been to the US I can't put much stock in your opinion.
I've actually been to Europe. UK, Germany, and France. France was just 2 days to be fair.
I've visited Orlando, Florida on holiday ad nauseam, and have visited Gettysburg, Manhatten NYC and Washington DC precisely once each, but that doesn't give me any special insight into American culture. Have you actually lived in Europe for any length of time?
Also yes, you are very similar to Canada, and I would argue that Canada is just as European as the U.S., for similar reasons. .
So very wrong there... So very very wrong... anyone who thinks Canadian and American cultures are that similar has no clue about one, or both, cultures or is judging "culture" on very simplistic terms like "do you eat hamburgers?"
The simple fact is, that differences WITHIN any culture are usually just as pronounced if not more so then any differences *between* cultures.
Everyone very much is a special unique snowflake, very much like everyone else, everyone is using everyone "else s" culture because culture doesn't belong to anyone, it "belongs" to those that practice it.
You guys realise that you are arguing about details, right? And that most of you are wrong in one way or another?
There is no such thing as European culture. Each country in Europe has its own and very distinct cultural identity.
Claiming that US culture is the same as "European" culture is also wrong. Yes, some traits of current US culture can trace their origins to some countries in Europe, but current US culture is an amalgamation of cultures from European, American, African and even Asian countries mixed with some things that have developed in the US exclusively. Conversely, we can also say that many elements in the current culture of European countries have been imported from the good ol' US of A, mainly thanks to WW2 but also from the constant bombardment that we are subjected in the form of American movies and TV shows.
All of this having been said, we share a whole bunch of cultural traits between our nations that are pretty much exclusive to Western Democracies. And thank Jeebus for that!
d-usa wrote: The biggest problem is that we have people pretending that there is such a thing as "European culture".
I wrote “European cultures”, with both bold and underline over the s. But maybe I will write “European cultures” next time, if that is what it takes not to be misunderstood.
That, and maybe you should read the rest of the phrase, which states that the French culture is different from the German culture, which in turn is different from the Spanish culture, and so on.
Let me try again, maybe I will manage to be understood. Here is what I am saying. There are many different cultures. Now, all those cultures are different, but some of them share similarities. Similarities that tend to have them regrouped under common families. For instance, the Chinese, Japanese and Korean culture are obviously very different from each others, and the German, French and English culture are obviously different from each other too. But yet, still, Japanese, Chinese and Korean cultures do share a bunch of similarities to each other, and German, French and English cultures do share a bunch of similarities that would make people naturally regroup those 6 cultures into two families. Now, of course there is no official categorization of the world's culture into families, but really, I would certainly feel much comfortable in the U.S. than I would in Korea or in India or in Niger. (Note that “more comfortable” does not generally means better, getting out of your comfort zone and discovering new things can be very exciting and fun too.) Actually I guess I would be more comfortable in the U.S. than I would in, say, Ukraine, and Ukraine is definitely part of Europe. So, yeah, if I am going to consider a family of cultures that I am going to call European cultures, it will certainly include the U.S. as well, along with Canada.
Grey Templar wrote: Well unless you've actually been to the US I can't put much stock in your opinion.
I have been to the U.S. California. Went around a bit, bolted through Las Vegas, slept in a tent near the Death Valley, went to see those trees that look like some kind of huge snot pillar that you call sequoia (that was really fun), grand canyon, … New York too, for a few days. I have family in the U.S. Also my parents have friends there.
I have been to Canada too. They had vegetarian sausages. That was very strange, tasting sausages again. I stopped eating sausage around 3 years old, and yet when tasting the vegetarian one, I still found out the taste seemed disturbingly similar to actual sausage. That was confirmed by non-vegetarians. Disturbing experience.
I have also been in South Korea. And India (but really, most of the time in Ladakh, which is a pretty specific part of India). And in Iran, and in Ukraine. You might recognize a few countries I used in my examples of countries I would feel more or less comfortable. Well, that was from experience.
d-usa wrote: The biggest problem is that we have people pretending that there is such a thing as "European culture".
I wrote “European cultures”, with both bold and underline over the s. But maybe I will write “European cultures” next time, if that is what it takes not to be misunderstood.
That, and maybe you should read the rest of the phrase, which states that the French culture is different from the German culture, which in turn is different from the Spanish culture, and so on.
Let me try again, maybe I will manage to be understood. Here is what I am saying. There are many different cultures. Now, all those cultures are different, but some of them share similarities. Similarities that tend to have them regrouped under common families. For instance, the Chinese, Japanese and Korean culture are obviously very different from each others, and the German, French and English culture are obviously different from each other too. But yet, still, Japanese, Chinese and Korean cultures do share a bunch of similarities to each other, and German, French and English cultures do share a bunch of similarities that would make people naturally regroup those 6 cultures into two families. Now, of course there is no official categorization of the world's culture into families, but really, I would certainly feel much comfortable in the U.S. than I would in Korea or in India or in Niger. (Note that “more comfortable” does not generally means better, getting out of your comfort zone and discovering new things can be very exciting and fun too.) Actually I guess I would be more comfortable in the U.S. than I would in, say, Ukraine, and Ukraine is definitely part of Europe. So, yeah, if I am going to consider a family of cultures that I am going to call European cultures, it will certainly include the U.S. as well, along with Canada.
Did I write your name or single you out? Maybe next time I don't write your name I will not write it in red and underline the blank space.
Well, you did directly reference what I said (about Switzerland), so, yeah, if you were not talking about me, making it explicit would be a pretty good idea. No need for red or underline here, just a few words like “we have people (not speaking about anyone specific in this thread)” or something to that effect.
Because here, it really felt like it was directed at me.
There is no such thing as a single "European culture", but there definitely is a European culture group, which is what people usually refer to when they say European culture. All European cultures share elements and have similarities that set them apart from distinctly non-European cultures, such as the Chinese ones. American (and Canadian, Australian etc. maybe even Latin American) culture all fall into this European culture group (unsurprising given that they are alternate developments of previous cultures from Europe).
I'm the last person to believe in white guilt or cis-male whatever crap. But yeah, The US government did attempt to commit genocide and wipe out the Native culture.
I don't know why people try to make it a guilt thing. The bit of it is done and over. Nothing can be done about it anymore. No guilt involved.
If there is anything to be 'guilty' over, it's that we've allowed the reservation system to continue. But that's not genocide. It's just bad policy.
Those guys that speak French, you mean? How un-European of them! Just like the French, the Swiss, the Belgians, …
Really, they totally set the U.S. apart from the rest of Europe: they have minorities that speaks French!
Ever been to Louisiana? I would be willing to bet money that you, a Frenchman go into Cajun-Speaking parts of Louisiana and attempt to speak your native language with them and not be able to understand much, if any of what they say.
To put it another way... If I went to say, Glasgow and went into a "locals" pub and start speaking to the locals about rugby, pints or whatever else, there will be a practical language barrier because even though on paper, we're speaking the "same" language, the dialects and accents are so different from each other that it makes it near impossible to understand each other.
As to some of your other points... Yeah, Jazz moved over to Europe, AFTER it was birthed in America.... and really, the story of Jazz is quite amazing, because it, like Blues come from a particular area, particular walk of life and even it (jazz and blues) didn't spring from nothing.... The Guitar, as an instrument was brought out of Africa, and these "Americans" took that instrument and put their soul into the sound, creating a wholly unique music that has been exported, added to and changed everywhere it goes.
If you want a prime example of how similar, yet how far apart Europe is from the US compare Soccer and "Football" or, compare Rugby to Football. You put a "real" american in front of a TV watching soccer, and he'll be bored to tears because he/she thinks its just 11 people jogging around after a ball, occasionally falling over in agony and then taking a kick at a big box.... Similarly with rugby, most Americans who see it are often like, "the tackle was made, why are they piling onto him!?!?! Won't the ref blow the whistle!? Why did he kick it there!?" Conversely you put most Germans, Frenchmen, and quite a few Brits in front of a Telly with an NFL or College football game on and it's quite the opposite, "Why are they playing rugby with all those things on? Why did the ref blow the whistle after the tackle? Where's the ruck? That's a blatantly forward pass!? How is THAT not a yellow card?"
I'm the last person to believe in white guilt or cis-male whatever crap. But yeah, The US government did attempt to commit genocide and wipe out the Native culture.
I don't know why people try to make it a guilt thing. The bit of it is done and over. Nothing can be done about it anymore. No guilt involved.
If there is anything to be 'guilty' over, it's that we've allowed the reservation system to continue. But that's not genocide. It's just bad policy.
Depends on how one look at those policies being the treaties that were made back in the day screwed Native Americans royally which over time screws over the State/Federal government today.
Iron_Captain wrote: There is no such thing as a single "European culture", but there definitely is a European culture group, which is what people usually refer to when they say European culture. All European cultures share elements and have similarities that set them apart from distinctly non-European cultures, such as the Chinese ones.
American (and Canadian, Australian etc. maybe even Latin American) culture all fall into this European culture group (unsurprising given that they are alternate developments of previous cultures from Europe).
I don't think so. Thinking and chatting about culture is interesting. Much philosophical.
I think you are being far too broad however.
there really isnt a European culture, or an Asian one.
One only has to tell a Scotsman how they are basically the same as the Irish, or a Chinese that they are basically the same as Japanese, ect ect
to realize that the differences between Scottish people and Irish are just as pronounced as the differences between the Japanese and Chinese, and just as much as the differences between Chinese and Scottish people.
I think we tend only to group up cultures when we dont really understand the differences, or are judging the cultures similarities based on very superficial, readily observable things like food, clothes, skin colour, and so on.
right or wrong, I do find the discussion of culture to be engaging and pleasant, and welcome/appreciate discussion on it.
Those guys that speak French, you mean? How un-European of them! Just like the French, the Swiss, the Belgians, …
Really, they totally set the U.S. apart from the rest of Europe: they have minorities that speaks French!
just try that with a Quebecois....
I have had much experience with francophone and Parisian "french" cultures... not only does the language sound different, but the Quebecois insist they are different from the Parisians, and Ive met many Parisians who are offended at the though of people assuming they are just like the Quebecois.
Last time I went, I was actually treated better when I spoke English then when I tried to speak Quebecois-french, got told I "spoke like a slowed duck"
and yet we have people claiming there even is such a thing as "canadian culture", when in reality, how people act in BC, alberta, to ontario and quebec is EXTREMELY different.
You go from dread locked hippy SJW's in BC, to red neck cowboys in the middle, to uppity latte sipping SSJWs in ontario, to speacial people who are much more special then anyone else in quebec, then to newfoundland, which is a culture beyond words, mostly because you cant understand em!
there really isnt a European culture, or an Asian one.
One only has to tell a Scotsman how they are basically the same as the Irish, or a Chinese that they are basically the same as Japanese, ect ect
to realize that the differences between Scottish people and Irish are just as pronounced as the differences between the Japanese and Chinese, and just as much as the differences between Chinese and Scottish people.
I think we tend only to group up cultures when we dont really understand the differences, or are judging the cultures similarities based on very superficial, readily observable things like food, clothes, skin colour, and so on.
right or wrong, I do find the discussion of culture to be engaging and pleasant, and welcome/appreciate discussion on it.
In many ways he is right though.... in a "typical" Western Society, we value individuals and individualism, on the flip side of that, most of the Eastern cultures I've been exposed to value the group over self.
For instance, a good army buddy of mine, from Hong Kong originally, married a "mainland" Chinese woman. before I left Fort Carson for Germany, he was seriously worried/stressed about what he was going to do about HER parents, as when he married her, it became his "responsibility" to house, feed and care for them in their retirement years. I know that doesn't sound so bad on the surface, but he was on soldier pay and it was doubtful whether he'd be granted a "special" dependent status for the in-laws. The craziest thing about the situation (from my point of view) was that her Dad was a multi-millionaire due to having owned one of the 3 largest beer brewers in China (I forgot which one it is, but it really is one of the richest within the country of China)
When I told that story to my buddy in Germany, who married a Japanese lady espoused much the same thing, and it was a source of friction between her and her parents (last I talked to him, that situation has died down some, with the understanding that if the means become available, they will uphold tradition)
So, while I agree, the sentiment of "European Culture" or "Asian Culture" is too broad in most sense, I think that it's OK to use the term when we're talking about the commonalities among us.
Nope. I heard Cajun singers though.
I am not saying Cajun are the same as French. I am saying that they share enough with European cultures in general to be in the same family of cultures.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Yeah, Jazz moved over to Europe, AFTER it was birthed in America....
Just like tons of stuff went to the U.S. after it was birthed in another European country. And therefore European countries exchanged ideas and arts and thinking and everything, and therefore ended up with cultures that have tons of similarities.
Pansori did not move over to Europe.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: If you want a prime example of how similar, yet how far apart Europe is from the US compare Soccer and "Football" or, compare Rugby to Football.
Well, not liking soccer is certainly a U.S. specificity. The sport is popular pretty much in every other country in the whole world!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: I think "western culture" would be the better choice of term there though.
West of what? And then, is Russia to be considered Western or… Eastern? What about Latin America?
“Western” is usually a relic of the cold war rhetoric. It mixes geopolitics and culture. It is very ambiguous. I would certainly rather speak about European cultures.
Western and Eastern have been accepted for quite a while in many areas outside of geo-politics. Culture and Medicine are just two such examples. I'm fairly certain that the world will continue to use the term despite your weird insistence to name everything after a single continent.
there really isnt a European culture, or an Asian one.
One only has to tell a Scotsman how they are basically the same as the Irish, or a Chinese that they are basically the same as Japanese, ect ect
to realize that the differences between Scottish people and Irish are just as pronounced as the differences between the Japanese and Chinese, and just as much as the differences between Chinese and Scottish people.
I think we tend only to group up cultures when we dont really understand the differences, or are judging the cultures similarities based on very superficial, readily observable things like food, clothes, skin colour, and so on.
right or wrong, I do find the discussion of culture to be engaging and pleasant, and welcome/appreciate discussion on it.
In many ways he is right though.... in a "typical" Western Society, we value individuals and individualism, on the flip side of that, most of the Eastern cultures I've been exposed to value the group over self.
For instance, a good army buddy of mine, from Hong Kong originally, married a "mainland" Chinese woman. before I left Fort Carson for Germany, he was seriously worried/stressed about what he was going to do about HER parents, as when he married her, it became his "responsibility" to house, feed and care for them in their retirement years. I know that doesn't sound so bad on the surface, but he was on soldier pay and it was doubtful whether he'd be granted a "special" dependent status for the in-laws. The craziest thing about the situation (from my point of view) was that her Dad was a multi-millionaire due to having owned one of the 3 largest beer brewers in China (I forgot which one it is, but it really is one of the richest within the country of China)
When I told that story to my buddy in Germany, who married a Japanese lady espoused much the same thing, and it was a source of friction between her and her parents (last I talked to him, that situation has died down some, with the understanding that if the means become available, they will uphold tradition)
So, while I agree, the sentiment of "European Culture" or "Asian Culture" is too broad in most sense, I think that it's OK to use the term when we're talking about the commonalities among us.
I totally agree with many of your points, but I want to stress that culture is very secular in nature, and has a very complicated, almost hegemonic, relationship with other cultures and "sects" or branches of itself.
for instance, much of my in laws are northern Chinese, who will very readily tell me how different the north vs south culture is in china!
In reply to your example, there was a time when you were *expected* to take care you your elderly parents and in laws in western culture as well so thats more those particular Chinese persons parents were more orthodox then most I would think., then that being a unique cultural trait.
about 50 of my in laws are Filipino, and they are also very adamant about how different they are from the Chinese.
I just find that when viewed from the perspective of an "outsider" that other cultures that are not familiar tend to blend together more then they should.
d-usa wrote: Culture and Medicine are just two such examples.
So, is Africa Western, or Eastern, or maybe neither, or both? Is Russia Western, or Eastern?
Just to be clear:
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us, but Western breaks your brain because geography?
Do you lump Africa in with European or Asian culture? Or do you in fact realize that there are more than two groups of global cultures?
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
d-usa wrote: Do you lump Africa in with European or Asian culture? Or do you in fact realize that there are more than two groups of global cultures?
I realize that there are more than two groups of global culture, unlike what “Western” implies.
I feel I have to return the favor: why do you have a problem with “European cultures”, but not with “Western cultures”?
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
Is Ford a European automaker? Is Coca-Cola a European Company?
What percentage of our population is of non-European heritage?
d-usa wrote: Do you lump Africa in with European or Asian culture? Or do you in fact realize that there are more than two groups of global cultures?
I realize that there are more than two groups of global culture, unlike what “Western” implies.
Western implies no such thing, and has many different meanings in many different contexts.
In geography there is west and east. Of course something can be west of something at the same time as it is east of something. And at the same time it can also be south and north of something as well.
During the cold war you had the Eastern Bloc, was Africa West or East?
Does Russia have an European Culture or an Asian Culture? What continent is it located in?
I feel I have to return the favor: why do you have a problem with “European cultures”, but not with “Western cultures”?
Because it's asinine to call something by the name of another continent when it has developed independently of that other continent for 400+ years and has been influenced by African culture, indigenous cultures, Eastern cultures, and South-American cultures during those years.
Africa is neither European nor Asian, and neither a Western Culture nor an Eastern Culture.
I feel I have to return the favor: why do you have a problem with “European cultures”, but not with “Western cultures”?
Because one actually exists and the other doesnt? As I sort of explained earlier, one of the most basic concepts that generally divide Eastern from Western cultures/societies is the role of "self" But, this term of East and West has been in use for centuries in nearly every academic form (politics, economics, history, etc)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: [
Does Russia have an European Culture or an Asian Culture? What continent is it located in?
Russia really is the oddball here.... Since probably the 18th-19th Centuries, Russia has really tried to push its way into being a proper "European" country, but for whatever reason, and there are hundreds, if not thousands to choose from, have remained much more in line with an "Eastern" culture/society.
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
Is Ford a European automaker? Is Coca-Cola a European Company?
What percentage of our population is of non-European heritage?
What percentage of Britain is non-british heritage, with the nordic and french influences?
How much of the french is roman?
If you want to play the descendant game, we're all just going to be African.
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
Is Ford a European automaker? Is Coca-Cola a European Company?
What percentage of our population is of non-European heritage?
What percentage of Britain is non-british heritage, with the nordic and french influences?
How much of the french is roman?
If you want to play the descendant game, we're all just going to be African.
Amazing how diverse culture has become since we first appeared in Africa 6,000 years ago
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
Is Ford a European automaker? Is Coca-Cola a European Company?
What percentage of our population is of non-European heritage?
What percentage of Britain is non-british heritage, with the nordic and french influences?
How much of the french is roman?
If you want to play the descendant game, we're all just going to be African.
Which is why its best to limit politics to living memory (i.e. the last century).
Somehow your brain can live with the concept that you call US culture European even though we are a completely different continent that manage not to touch anywhere with a giant ocean separating us
Yeah, given how the U.S.A. is populated by descendants of people that came from Europe.
And Africa, and Asia, in addition to Native Americans.
(Oh and I know Europe has Jazz now too, that doesn't mean it's not originally a uniquely American art form).
d-usa wrote: Because it's asinine to call something by the name of another continent when it has developed independently of that other continent for 400+ years and has been influenced by African culture, indigenous cultures, Eastern cultures, and South-American cultures during those years.
And yet during all that time it had been influence much, much more by European cultures than by African, or Asian cultures, and it has influenced much, much more European cultures in return. It is also noteworthy that during that time period, many other European cultures have been similarly, or even more so, influenced by Asian and African cultures than the U.S.
And calling a culture “Western” when not saying on the west of what they are supposed to be, in denial of geography, is somehow less asinine?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hordini wrote: And Africa, and Asia, in addition to Native Americans.
.
Did you know Europe also has a lot of people coming from Africa and Asia? I would not be that surprised if France had more people that came from Asia than the U.S., or at least a bigger ratio.
Hordini wrote: (Oh and I know Europe has Jazz now too, that doesn't mean it's not originally a uniquely American art form).
That is about as asinine as saying “I know Europe has french fries too now, but that does not mean it was not originally a uniquely Belgian/French dish”.
And calling a culture “Western” when not saying on the west of what they are supposed to be, in denial of geography, is somehow less asinine?
It's almost like the people initially defining Western and Eastern cultures as two broad sets of cultures that are respectively West and East of each other based on almost all map projections, ancient and current, used by the people defining it somehow managed to solve this crisis without the difficulties that you imagine by the term.
Hordini wrote: And Africa, and Asia, in addition to Native Americans.
.
Did you know Europe also has a lot of people coming from Africa and Asia? I would not be that surprised if France had more people that came from Asia than the U.S., or at least a bigger ratio.
Hordini wrote: (Oh and I know Europe has Jazz now too, that doesn't mean it's not originally a uniquely American art form).
That is about as asinine as saying “I know Europe has french fries too now, but that does not mean it was not originally a uniquely Belgian/French dish”.
I've actually lived in Europe, so yes, I'm aware there are people of African and Asian descent there. The ratio will vary depending on where in the US you are talking about, but there are way, way more Asians in the US than in France.
And saying that something originated in America but is now in Europe is as asinine as saying something originated in a European country and is still in Europe? Okay.
This has been going in circles for a while now, mostly off the original topic and just needs to die. If you want to start a discussion about if Europe is Europe is American is African is Western is Eastern, and you REALLY feel like it needs to be discussed (really think hard on that), then start a thread for it
.
